';  V 


SiliiMIMM 


.  i 


L>.visi«aB£49( 


ScctloQ 


4 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


THE    BIBLE    FOR    HOME    AND    SCHOOL 

SHAILER  MATHEWS,  General  Editor 


GENESIS 

By  Professor  H.  G.  Mitchell 
DEUTERONOMY 

By  Professor  W.  G.  Jordan 

JUDGES 

By  Professor  Edward  L.  Curtis 

JOB 

By  Professor  George  A.  Barton 

ISAIAH 

By  Professor  John  E.  McFadyen 
AMOS,  ROSEA,  AND  MICAH 

By  Professor  J.  M.  Powis  Smith 

MATTHEW 

By  Professor  A.  T.  Robertson 

MARK 

By  Professor  M.  W.  Jacobus 

ACTS 

By  Professor  George  H.  Gilbert 

GALATIANS 

By  Professor  B.  W.  Bacon 
EPHESIANS  AND  COLOSSIANS 

By  Reverend  Gross  Alexander 

HEBREWS 

By  Professor  E.  J.  Goodspeed 

VOLUMES  IN  PREPARATION 

I  SAMUEL 

By  Professor  L.  W.  Batten 

PSALMS 

By  Reverend  J.  P.  Peters 

JOHN 

By  Professor  Shailer  Mathews 

ROMANS 

By  Professor  E.  I.  Bosworth 
I  AND  II  CORINTHIANS 

By  Professor  J.  S.  Riggs 


THE  BIBLE  FOR  HOME  AND  SCHOOL 


A  COMMENTARY 

ON  X^^-*/  . 

THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING 
TO  MARK 


BY 
MELANCTHON  W.  JACOBUS,  D.D. 

DEAN  OF  THE  FACULTY  AND  HOSMER  PROFESSOR  OF  NEW 

TESTAMENT  EXEGESIS,  HARTFORD  THEOLOGICAL 

SEMINARY 


Nrm  fork 

THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

1915 

All  rights  reserved 


Copyright,  iqis 

By  the  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

Set  up  and  electrotyped.    Published  September,  1915. 


The  references  in  the  foot-notes  marked  "  SV  "  are  to  the  American  Standard 
Edition  of  the  Revised  Bible.     Copyright,  1901,  by  Thomas  Nelson  &  Sons. 
By  PEEiassioN  of  xh£  Pubushers. 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION 

The  Bible  for  Home  and  School  is  intended  to  place 
the  results  of  the  best  modern  bibhcal  scholarship  at  the 
disposal  of  the  general  reader.  It  does  not  seek  to  dupli- 
cate other  commentaries  to  which  the  student  must  turn. 
Its  chief  characteristics  are  (a)  its  rigid  exclusion  of  all 
processes,  both  critical  and  exegetical,  from  its  notes; 
(b)  its  presupposition  and  its  use  of  the  assured  results 
of  historical  investigation  and  criticism  wherever  such 
results  throw  light  on  the  biblical  text;  (c)  its  running 
analysis  both  in  text  and  conmient;  (d)  its  brief  explana- 
tory notes  adapted  to  the  rapid  reader;  (e)  its  thorough 
but  brief  Introductions;  (/)  its  use  of  the  Revised  Version 
of  1 88 1,  supplemented  with  all  important  renderings  in 
other  versions. 

Biblical  science  has  progressed  rapidly  during  the  past 
few  years,  but  the  reader  still  lacks  a  brief,  comprehensive 
commentary  that  shall  extend  to  him  in  usable  form  mate- 
rial now  at  the  disposition  of  the  student.  It  is  hoped 
that  in  this  series  the  needs  of  intelligent  Sunday  School 
teachers  have  been  met,  as  well  as  those  of  clergymen 
and  lay  readers,  and  that  in  scope,  purpose,  and  loyalty 
to  the  Scriptures  as  a  foundation  of  Christian  thought  and 
Hfe,  its  volumes  will  stimulate  the  intelligent  use  of  the 
Bible  in  the  home  and  the  school. 

SHAILER  MATHEWS. 


NOTE 

The  Author  desires  to  acknowledge  the  assistance  given 
him  by  his  colleague,  Professor  William  H.  Worrell,  in 
the  reading  of  the  proof  and  the  compilation  of  the 
Indices — the  latter  being  entirely  of  his  own  hand. 

M.  W.  J. 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Introduction i 

I.  The  Gospel  Itself i 

II.  The  Tradition  Regarding  the  Gospel         ...  6 

III.  The  Sources  of  the  Gospel  .         .         .12 

IV.  The  Relation  of  Mark  to  Matthew  and  Luke     .         .  16 
V.  The  Date  of  Mark 23 

VI.  The  Historical  Value  of  Mark          ....  24 

VII.  The  Text 26 

VIII.  Analysis 29 

IX.  Bibliography 34 

Commentary 37 

Index 249 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


INTRODUCTION 

For  the  interpreter  of  any  narrative  writing  it  is  of 
fundamental  importance  that  he  should  know  the  his- 
torical value  of  the  narrative  which  it  contains. 

The  first  question,  therefore,  which  presents  itself  in  an 
introduction  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Gospels  is  as  to 
their  origin.  If  they  come  to  us  from  the  ApostoKc  times 
and  embody  the  testimony  of  those  who  participated  in 
the  events  which  they  record,  there  is  a  historical  value 
to  their  narrative  which  is  lacking  if  their  origin  is  in  a 
later  age  and  their  testimony  that  of  those  who  knew  the 
facts  simply  from  long  developed  tradition.  It  is  only 
natural  that  we  should  inquire  as  to  the  writers  of  the 
Gospels  and  their  sources  of  information,  and  it  is  quite 
as  natural  that,  for  an  answer  to  our  query,  we  should  go 
first  to  the  Gospels  themselves.  Did  the  earliest  testimony 
we  have  regarding  them  profess  to  be  contemporaneous 
with  their  origin,  the  question  of  their  historical  value 
would  be  a  simple  matter.  As,  however,  they  lie  con- 
fessedly behind  the  testimony  which  is  given  to  them,  they 
present  a  problem  in  themselves  which  invites  our  first 
attention. 

I.  The  Gospel  Itself 

I.  In  coming  to  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  we  find  that  in 
common  with  all  the  narrative  writings,  but  unlike  almost 
all  the  Epistles  of  the  New  Testament,  it  does  not  contain 
the  name  of  its  author. 

While  it  may  be  difficult  to  avoid  the  conviction  that 
in  the  incident  of  14  :  5  if.  the  Author  gives  his  own  ex- 
perience, referring  to  himself  as  "a,  certain  young  man" 
io  a  similarly  indefinite  way  to  the  Fourth   Evangel- 


INTRODUCTION 


ist's  generally  accepted  reference  to  himself  in  his  Gospel 
(Jn.  i8  :  i5f.;  20  :  i-io);  yet  there  is  no  means  of  identify- 
ing the  ''young  man"  there  mentioned — not  even  to  the  ex- 
tent of  proving  that  he  was  one  of  the  personal  disciples  of 
Jesus.  ^ 

From  a  general  study  of  the  Gospel,  however,  it  is  clear 
that,  while  it  lacks  the  Jewish  cast  of  narrative  evident  in 
the  First  Gospel,  yet  the  famiHarity  which  the  Author 
shows  with  Jewish  geography  (cf.  i  :  38  [see  notes];  4  :  35 
with  5  :  i;  4  :  45  [see  notes];  7  :  31;  8  :  22,  27  [see  notes]; 
10  :  I  [see  notes])  and  with  Jewish  customs  (cf.  2  :  18-20; 
5  :  38;  7  :  2-4;  II  :  15;  14  :  i;  15  : 6)  and  beliefs  (cf.  12  : 
18),  and  the  abiHty  which  he  seems  to  have  in  explaining 
them  (cf.  7  :  2ff.;  14  :  12;  15  :  42) — particularly  his  ac- 
quaintance with  the  Aramaic  language,  which  he  is  con- 
stantly translating  for  his  readers'  use  (cf.  3  :  17;  5  141; 
7  :  II,  34;  10  146;  14  136;  15  :  22,  34)— mark  him  as  a 
Jewish  Christian. 

2.  It  cannot  be  claimed  that  these  facts  prove,  on  the 
other  hand,  that  the  readers  of  the  Gospel  were  Gentile 
Christians;  for  the  Jewish  Christian  readers  of  the  First 
Gospel  were  equally  unacquainted  with  these  Palestinian 
details.  Yet  they  add  to  the  significant  presence  in  the 
Gospel  of  certain  Latin  terms  (e.g.  the  original  for  "bed," 
2  :4;  6  :  55;  "pots,"  7  14;  "centurion,"  15  139,  44f.;  the 
phrase  "began  as  they  went,"  2  :  23;  "soldier  of  the 
guard,"  6  :  27;  "wishing  to  content,"  15  :  15)  and  to  the 
evident  desire  of  the  Author  at  times  to  use  these  terms 
for  the  sake  of  being  understood  by  his  readers  (cf.  12  : 
42,  "which  make  a  farthing";  15  :  16,  "which  is  the 
Praetorium").^  When  in  addition  it  is  considered  that, 
apart  from  references  made  by  Jesus  himself  and  by  others, 

*  For  full  discussion  of  this  point,  see  Zahn,  Introduction  to  the  New 
Testament,  vol.  ii,  pp.  491-494. 

2  Note  the  absence  of  all  such  explanations  when  reference  is  made 
to  Pilate  and  his  official  position  (15  :  i)  and  to  poUtical  events  during 
his  tenn  of  office  (15  :  7). 

2 


INTRODUCTION 


there  is  almost  a  total  absence  of  Old  Testament  quota- 
tions as  an  argumentative  background  for  the  narrative, 
or  of  any  reference  to  the  Law  as  such,  it  would  seem  that 
the  Gentile  character  of  the  readers  was  a  natural  inference. 

3.  There  is  nothing  in  the  Gospel  which  definitely  locates 
the  readers.  Acquaintance  with  Latin  throughout  the 
Roman  Empire  was  too  wide  to  make  the  Author's  em- 
ployment of  words  and  phrases  from  this  language  con- 
clusive evidence  that  the  readers  resided  in  Rome ;  though 
the  fact  that,  as  compared  with  the  other  Gospels,  the 
Latin  atmosphere  of  the  Markan  writing  is  distinctive 
would  agree  with  such  a  residence,  could  it  otherwise  be 
proved,  and  would  in  general  indicate  that  the  readers 
belonged  to  the  Western  rather  than  the  Eastern  part  of 
the  Early  Church.  Were  we  assured  as  to  the  identity  of 
the  Rufus  mentioned  by  Paul  in  his  letter  to  the  Roman 
Church  (16  :  13)  with  the  Rufus  mentioned  in  the  Gospel 
(15  :  21)  as  one  of  the  children  of  Simon  of  Cyrene,  we 
might  infer  that  the  author's  inclusion  of  these  children 
in  his  recital  of  the  incident  was  due  to  the  fact  that  his 
readers  lived  in  Rome  and  would  be  naturally  interested 
in  this  detail.  Possibly  the  emphasis  which  he  places  on 
things  clean  and  unclean  (7  :  1-23)  might  be  considered  as 
due  to  the  discussion  of  this  distinction  which  we  learn 
from  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  (ch.  14)  was  prevalent  in 
that  community.  These  points  in  themselves,  however, 
are,  neither  singly  nor  together,  conclusive  as  to  the  resi- 
dence of  the  readers. 

4.  To  these  readers,  born  and  bred  as  they  had  been  in 
the  great  world  of  Gentile  action,  it  was  the  author's  pur- 
pose to  present  Jesus  in  the  actual  reality  of  his  wonderful 
life.  He  was  not  concerned  with  proving  him  to  be  the 
fulfilment  of  Messianic  prophecy,  as  was  the  First  Evan- 
gehst,  nor  with  presenting  him  as  the  realization  of  the 
world's  need  of  a  Saviour,  as  was  the  Third  Evangelist,  or 
with  portraying  him  as  the  objective  of  the  soul's  spiritual 
communion,  as  was  the  Fourth  Evangelist;  his  aim  was 

3 


INTRODUCTION 


simply  to  show  him  to  others  as  he  had  showed  himself  to 
his  disciples  in  all  the  human  and  superhuman  facts  of  his 
life.  One  cannot  but  be  impressed  with  the  objectivity 
of  the  narrative;  but  it  does  not  present  itself  as  the  product 
of  a  literary  realism,  but  of  a  vivid  recollection.  It  seems 
as  though  it  was  written  with  the  conviction,  not  that 
something  new  had  been  discovered,  but  that  something 
new  had  happened  in  the  history  of  the  world.^  It  brings 
into  light,  beyond  the  other  Gospels,  the  real  humanity  of 
Jesus  {e.g.  his  compassion,  i  :  41;  his  anger,  3  :  5;  10  :  14; 
his  love,  10  :  21 ;  his  subjection  to  bodily  fatigue,  4  :  38;  his 
liabiHty  to  surprise,  6  :  6;  his  suffering  of  hunger,  11  :  12; 
his  lack  of  knowledge,  13  132),  and  at  the  same  time  his 
consciousness  of  supreme  authority  over  and  of  holding 
in  himself  the  destiny  of  the  religious  life  of  man  {e.g. 
2  :  10,  28;  10  :  45;  14  :  62).  It  contains  few  of  the  dis- 
courses of  Jesus ;  the  narrative  is  devoted  rather  to  making 
prominent,  not  only  the  remarkable  deeds  of  his  Kfe,  but 
the  startling  impressions  which  they  produced  on  those  who 
witnessed  them  {e.g.  i  :  27;  2  :  12;  4  :  41;  5  142;  6  :  51) — 
impressions  which  necessarily  obtained  more  during  the 
early  period  of  his  work  among  the  people,  than  during  the 
later  period,  when  he  gave  himself  to  the  instruction  of  his 
disciples  and  to  controversy  with  the  religious  leaders  in 
Jerusalem. 

5.  Such  a  purpose  naturally  expressed  itself  in  a  charac- 
teristically vivid,  and  at  the  same  time,  simple  narrative 
style.  It  is  consequently  noticeable  that  when  words 
would  add  nothing  to  the  depiction  of  the  incident,  the 
record  is  compressed  {e.g.  i  :  2f.;  6  :  7-13;  8  :  10-13;  9  :  2-8; 

10  :  2-12;  12  :  13-17);  where  they  would  give  Hfe  and 
color  to  it,  they  are  employed  freely  and  without  strict 
regard  to  rules  of  rhetoric  {e.g.  1  :  40-45;  3  •  i~6;  5  :  i- 
20,  21-43;  6  :  14-29,  30-46;  8  : 1-9;  9  :  14-29;  10  '-  46-52; 

11  :  15-19,  2of.;  12  :  28-34);  so  that  the  Author  comes  to 
the  frequent  use  of  certain  striking  words,  such  as  "  straight- 

1  Denney,  Jesus  and  the  Gospel,  p.  266. 
4 


INTRODUCTION 


way,"  42  times  between  chs.  i  and  9;  7  times  between 
chs.  10  and  16;  "astonished,"  i  :  27;  10  :  24;  "amazed,"  9  : 
15;  "terrified,"  16  :  5;  "hardened,"  6  :  52;  8  :  17;  "ques- 
tion," "dispute,"  I  :  27;  9  :  10,  14,  16,  and  often  to  the 
use  of  a  word  that  gives  a  vividness  to  the  incident,  or  a 
forceful  point  to  the  saying  (e.g.  "to  stoop  down,"  1:7; 
"rent  asunder,"  i  :  10;  "strictly  charged  him,"  i  14^; 
"looked  round  about,"  5  132;  "sat  down  in  ranks" — lit. 
'in  groups  of  garden  beds,'  6  :  40;  "moored  to  the  shore," 
6  :  53;  "behold  them  as  trees,  walking,"  8  :  24;  "taking  in 
the  arms  in  embrace,"  9  136;  10  :  16;  "casting  away  his  gar- 
ment," 10  :  50;  "withered  away  from  the  roots,"  11  :  20; 
"exceeding  vehemently,"  14  131).  There  is  thus  a  minute- 
ness of  detail  that  makes  the  narrative  a  "reproduction 
rather  than  a  representation"  of  the  events.  He  has  also 
a  certain  picturesque  use  of  his  tenses  (e.g.  the  imperfect 
to  represent  the  movement  of  the  action,  5  :  18  [was  be- 
seeching]; 7  :  17  [were  asking];  15  :  47  [were  beholding]; 
the  present,  to  place  the  reader  at  the  point  of  action, 
2  :  I  [is  in  the  house],  while  passages,  such  as  4  .-35-41; 
6  :  30-51;  12  141-44;  14  :  53-5Sj  where  the  present  and 
the  imperfect  are  interchanged  with  the  aorist,  as  the  nar- 
rative proceeds,  are  pecuHarly  vivid),  and  a  fondness  in 
the  use  of  the  direct  form  of  speech  (e.g.  i  137;  3  :  21; 
4  :  39;  5  •  8,  12;  6  :  31;  9  :  25;  10  :  35;  16  :  3).!  Were  the 
EvangeHsts  modern  annalists,  trained  in  the  use  of  de- 
scriptive narrative,  these  characteristics  would  mean  noth- 
ing more  than  that  in  our  Second  Gospel  we  had  evidence 
of  an  Author  who  had  mastered  his  art.  But,  w^hatever 
else  the  EvangeHsts  were,  they  were  not  technical  histo- 
rians. Even  the  author  of  the  Third  Gospel  was  not  a 
trained  investigator  of  records,  and,  while  he  shows  a  lit- 
erary abihty  which  his  fellow  Evangelists  do  not  possess, 
it  is  not  employed  in  heightening  the  historical  realism  of 
the  narrative  which  he  presents,  but,  on  the  contrary,  in 
smoothing  it  out  into  a  polished  story,  fit  for  the  cultured 
^  For  added  details,  see  Zahn,  Introduction,  vol.  ii,  p.  481,  note  (4). 

S 


INTRODUCTION 


ears  of  his  patron  Theophilus.  The  vivid  style  of  our 
Second  Evangelist  is  significant,  therefore,  as  indicating 
that  the  story  he  tells  comes  from  sources  which  were  in 
close  contact  with  the  events  themselves. 

6.  As  a  result  of  this  inductive  study  of  the  Gospel,  it 
would  seem  that  we  should  be  justified  in  saying  that  it 
was  written  wxU  within  the  Apostohc  Age  and  by  one  who 
belonged  to  the  Gospel  Generation.  In  fact,  if  our  Gospel 
be  compared  with  the  other  two  Synoptics  in  its  phrasing 
of  the  apocalyptic  discourse  of  ch.  13,  the  significant  ab- 
sence from  it  of  any  impHcation  that  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  had  taken  place  would  seem  to  put  the  composi- 
tion of  the  Gospel  before  70  a.d.^ 

II.  The  Tradition  Regarding  the  Gospel 

1.  When  we  study  the  external  testimony  concerning 
the  Gospel,  we  find  its  authorship  uniformly  assigned  to 
the  Mark  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament  as  the  com- 
panion of  Saul  and  Barnabas  during  a  portion  of  their  first 
mission  tour  (Acts  12  125;  13  :  5),  which,  however,  for 
some  reason  he  abandoned  (Acts  13  :  i3f .) ;  then  later,  be- 
cause of  Paul's  refusal,  as  accompanying  the  latter  on  his 
separated  mission  journey  to  Cyprus  (Acts  15  :  39f.);  ^  but 
in  the  earliest  and  latest  references  to  him,  as  apparently 
associated  with  Peter,  under  whose  influences  his  Christian 
life  may  have  begun  (Acts  12  :  12;  i  Pet.  5  :  13). 

2.  We  find,  moreover,  that  this  testimony  assigns  the 
source  of  the  Gospel's  contents  primarily  to  Peter.  The 
way  in  which  the  Apostle  furnished  the  material  is  va- 
riously described  but  is  really  determined  by  the  state- 

^  Note  verses  i3f.,  24,  30,  33,  which  seem  to  consider  the  fulfilment 
of  the  apocalyptic  utterances  as  still  in  the  future  and  lack  such  inti- 
mations of  its  accomplishment  as  seem  to  be  present  in  Lk.  21  :  20, 
24,  or  such  evidence  of  the  transference  of  it  to  the  end  of  the  world 
as  appear  in  Matt.  24  :  3, 14,  29. 

2  For  evidence  of  his  reinstatement  in  Paul's  favor  and  of  further 
work  with  him,  cf.  CoL  4  :  10;  Philem.  ver.  24;  2  Tim.  4:11. 

6 


INTRODUCTION 


ment  of  Papias,  which  is  not  only  the  earUcst  evidence 
bearing  upon  the  point,  but  that  from  which  all  the  follow- 
ing evidence  has  clearly  been  developed.^  This  statement 
of  Papias  is  to  the  effect  that  Mark,  while  not  a  follower  of 
Jesus  in  his  ministry,  had  been  with  Peter  m  his  mission 
work  and  having  become  his  "interpreter" — a  relation  in 
this  case  not  altogether  easy  to  understand — had  com- 
mitted to  writing  what  he  could  remember  of  the  Apostle's 
Gospel  addresses.  These  addresses  were  delivered,  not 
with  the  purpose  of  presenting  a  gathered  arrangement  of 
the  Lord's  sayings,  but  in  a  way  to  suit  the  needs  of  each 
occasion,  while  the  writing  down  of  them  was  itself  not  in 
order. 

3.  This  mention  of  the  lack  of  order  in  Mark's  writing 
has  occasioned  considerable  discussion  and  has  given  rise 
to  the  theory  that  the  writing  Papias  had  in  mind  was  not 
our  Gospel  but  some  fragmentary  document,  whose  ill 
arranged  contents  Mark  had  gathered  from  Peter's  dis- 
courses and  which  may  have  formed  the  basis  for  our 
Gospel,  but  which  has  been  hopelessly  lost.  It  is  to  be 
noted,  however,  that  Papias'  description  of  Mark's  writ- 
ing, from  its  wording  in  the  original,  refers  to  the  lack 
rather  of  an  orderly  arrangement  of  its  contents  than  an 
orderly  sequence  of  its  events,^  and  is  doubtless  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  arrangement  of  Mark's  writing  was  being 
compared  with  that  of  some  other  Gospel  writing  which 
was  considered  preferable  to  his.^ 

4.  At  the  same  time,  it  is  to  be  admitted  that  while  the 

^  This  statement  of  Papias  is  preserved  for  us  in  Eusebius'  Ecclesi- 
astical History  (iii,  39). 

2  The  element  in  which  the  writing  was  lacking  is  given  as  rdfts, 
which,  as  distinguished  from  Kade^ijs,  implies  arrangement,  rather 
than  sequence.  (See  Luke's  use  of  the  latter  word  in  the  prologue  to 
his  Gospel  (1:3)  and  Plato's  use  of  the  former  word  in  his  Republic 
(637,  E.  Also  note  article  by  Colson  in  Journal  of  Theological  Studies, 
Oct.  1912,  pp.  62-69.) 

^  Most  likely  Matthew's  Gospel  which  is  characterized  by  the 
grouping  of  its  material,  discourses  as  well  as  events. 


INTRODUCTION 


Gospel  presents  in  general  a  consistently  developed  plan  of 
Jesus'  ministry  and  in  the  main  current  of  its  narrative 
is  chronological  in  its  sequence  of  sayings  and  events,^ 
there  is  evidence  of  a  tendency  topically  to  group  the 
material  {e.g.  3  :  1-6,  where  the  healing  of  the  withered 
hand,  w^hich  in  view  of  its  resultant  combination  of  Phari- 
sees and  Herodians  against  Jesus,  must  have  occurred 
much  later,  has  been  brought  forward  and  placed  with  the 
early  incident  of  the  plucking  of  the  grain — the  only  other 
incident  of  controversy  over  Sabbath  observance  this  Gos- 
pel contains;  also  3  :  22-30,  where  the  presence  of  Jeru- 
salemite  scribes  may  possibly  indicate  that  this  attack  has 
been  interpolated  into  the  incident  of  the  anxiety  of  Jesus' 
family  for  his  welfare  [3  :  i9b-2i,  31-35],  because  of  the 
association  of  the  Beelzebub  charge  with  the  family's  illu- 
sion as  to  Jesus'  sanity;  also  9  :  38-41  which  may  have 
been  interpolated  because  of  the  common  reference  to 
ministry  in  Jesus'  name,  the  thought  of  ver.  37  being 
clearly  resumed  at  ver.  42).  There  are  also  to  be  recog- 
nized colorings  of  the  narrative,  w^hich  are  evidently  due  to 
later  doctrinal  and  apocalyptic  points  of  view  {e.  g.  1:4, 
where  the  content  of  the  Baptist's  preaching  is  phrased  in 
accordance  with  the  Gospel  preaching  of  the  early  Church 
[cf.  Acts  2  :  ^S;  10  143;  13  :38f.];  4  :  10-12,  where  the 
reason  given  by  Jesus  for  his  use  of  parables  is  made  to 
accord  with  the  later  Apostolic  explanation  of  the  puzzling 
rejection  of  Jesus'  mission  by  the  people  of  God  [cf.  Acts 
2  :  23;  4  :  28;  Rom.  11  :  yi.,  25;  i  Pet.  2  :  8] — as  is  also 
present  in  6  :  52;  7  :  i9b-22,  where  Jesus'  words  are  inter- 
preted and  the  list  of  evils  is  determined  in  the  light  of  such 
controversies  as  arose  in  the  ApostoHc  Age  [cf.  i  Cor.  6  : 
12-20;  8;  10  :  23-33;  Rom.  14;  compare  also  Acts,  10  :  15 
with  such  lists  as  are  given  in  Gal.  5  :  19-21;  Rom.  i  : 
29-31;  Eph.  4  :  19,  31;  5  :  3f.];  9  :  41,  where  the  disciples 
are  to  be  known  by  the  name  of  followers  of  Christ  [cf. 

1  Menzies,  The  Earliest  Gospel,  pp.  29-33;  Burkitt,  Earliest  Sources 
of  the  Life  of  Jesus,  p.  88f.;  Swete,  Mark,  pp.  lii-lv. 

8 


INTRODUCTION 


Acts  II  :  26;  Rom.  8  :  9;  i  Cor.  3  :  23);  particularly, 
ch.  13,  where  we  have  in  such  passages  as  vs.  5-10,  12-14, 
17-20,  22-27,  7,3 J  37 J  ^  v^ry  general  amplification  and 
modification  of  Jesus'  eschatological  discourse,  influenced 
by  the  Apocalyptic  ideas  present  in  the  Church  under  the 
stress  and  strain  of  the  impending  catastrophe  with  which 
the  Jewish  war  came  to  its  close.  There  are  also  clearly 
present  minor  inaccuracies  of  statement  {e.g.  i  :  39,  where 
"throughout  all  Galilee"  is  manifestly  inconsistent  with 
the  restricted  region  of  the  tour,  as  given  in  the  preceding 
verse;  2  :  26,  where  "  Abiathar"  is  given  as  the  name  of  the 
high  priest,  instead  of  Ahimelech  [cf.  i  Sam.  21  :  i];  7  : 
3ff.,  where  the  ablutions  referred  to  are  stated  to  have 
been  practised  by  ''all  the  Jews" — a  manifest  exaggera- 
tion as  to  their  observance.  There  is  also  the  more  se- 
rious misstatement  of  14  :  12,  which  identifies  the  Last 
Supper  with  the  Passover  Feast  (cf.  Lev.  23  :  5f.).^ 

5.  These  facts,  however,  do  not  necessarily  prove  that 
the  Markan  writing  to  which  Papias  refers  could  not  have 
been  the  Gospel  as  we  have  it  before  us  to-day.  Grouping 
of  incidents  may  have  been  a  feature  of  Peter's  dis- 
courses— which  were  suited  to  the  special  occasions  on 
which  they  were  delivered;  and  such  dogmatic  and  apoc- 
alyptic coloring  of  the  narrative  as  discloses  itself  was 
present  in  the  thought  of  the  Apostolic  Church  of  Mark's 
own  day;  while  the  errors  are  such  as  Mark  himself  may 
have  committed.  If  he  was  a  cousin  of  Barnabas,  the 
Levite  (Col.  4  :  10),  he  may  have  considered  the  practices 
which  he  saw  observed  in  the  circle  of  his  family  relations 
as  observed  generally  by  all,  and  so  have  made  the  exag- 
gerated statement  of  7  :  3ff . ;  ^  whereas  if  the  identifying 
of  the  Last  Supper  with  the  Passover  was  due  to  the  fact 
that  the  later  Roman  custom  of  regarding  the  Eucharist 
as  a  reproduction  of  the  Paschal  Meal  had  already  begun, 

1  For  a  detailed  analysis  of  the  contents  of  the  Gospel,  see  Moffatt, 
Neiv  Testament  Introduction,  pp.  221-225. 

2  Burkitt,  Sources,  p.  gif. 

9 


INTRODUCTION 


this  may  be  a  confirmation  of  the  tradition  that  Mark 
wrote  his  Gospel  from  Rome.^  On  the  other  hand,  if  such 
errors  as  i  :  39  and  2  :  26  cannot  be  assigned  to  Mark, 
they  are  as  likely  due  to  misunderstanding  and  carelessness 
on  the  part  of  an  early  copyist,  as  to  the  deliberate  work 
of  a  later  redactor.  Especially  might  this  be  so  in  the  case 
of  the  proper  name  of  2  :  26  if  we  accept  the  suggestion 
that  such  hardly  explainable  names  as  Boanerges  and  Dal- 
manutha  (3  :  17  and  8  :  10)  are  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
copyist  had  a  poorly  legible  exemplar  with  which  to  strug- 
gle.^ Were  the  name  originally  written  Abimelech,  as  in 
I  Chron.  18  :  16,  the  mistake  in  a  poorly  written  text 
might  not  have  been  impossible. 

6.  It  is  further  admitted  that  the  anecdotal  character  of 
the  first  half  of  the  Gospel — up  to  8  :  27 — is  in  contrast  to 
the  definite  sequence  of  the  later  half.  This  does  not,  how- 
ever, necessitate  that  the  material  of  the  earher  narra- 
tive was  drawn  from  fragmentary  records  current  in  the 
Church,  rather  than  from  Peter's  preaching,  nor  that  the 
developed  character  of  the  later  narrative  was  wholly 
independent  of  the  Apostle.  For  the  purpose  of  illustra- 
tion, Peter  may  have  grouped  incidents  and  sayings  in  his 
discourses;  for  the  same  purpose,  he  may  have  recited 
them  singly  and  without  definite  time  connection  among 
themselves  or  with  more  than  a  general  assignment  of 
them  to  any  one  portion  of  the  ministry.  The  fact  that 
we  have  both  the  earher  and  the  later  portions  of  the 
Gospel  arranged  in  an  order  which  discloses  a  distinct  de- 
velopment in  Jesus'  work  may  be  due  to  what  was  under- 
stood in  the  Church  to  have  been  the  general  progress  of 
the  ministry;  but  such  an  understanding  must  have  been 
vague  and  confused  in  comparison  with  that  had  by  one 
who  had  personally  participated  in  the  ministry,  as  the 
Apostle  had  done,  and  whether  the  Gospel  was  written 
during  Peter's  life  or  after  it  had  ceased,  Mark's  associa- 

^  Bacon,  The  Beginnings  of  Gospel  Story,  p.  xxixff.,  195-198;  Burkitt, 
Sources,  pp.  92-94.  2  Burkitt,  Sources,  p.  32f. 


INTRODUCTION 


tion  with  the  Apostle  must  have  made  him  famihar  with 
the  general  sequence  of  the  periods  of  the  ministry  and 
with  the  general  development  of  its  purpose  and  aim 
long  before  he  committed  these  incidents  and  sayings  to 
writing. 

7.  It  is,  of  course,  obvious  that  the  contents  of  the  Gos- 
pel did  not  originate  directly  with  Peter  in  the  sense  of 
constituting  them  his  personal  Gospel.  His  early  appear- 
ance in  the  narrative  (cf.  i  :  i6f.,  2gi.),  together  with  his 
prominence  in  it  (i  :  36;  3  :  i6f.;  8  :  2gi.,  32f.;  9  :  2f.;  10  : 
28;  II  :  21;  13  :  3;  14  :  29,  SS,  37,  54,  66f.;  16  :  7)  show 
him,  not  so  much  to  have  been  the  only  source  of  the  in- 
formation,^ as  to  have  formed  the  personal  atmosphere 
in  which  the  commonly  received  traditions  were  repro- 
duced.^ 

8.  On  the  whole,  however,  the  definite  statement  of 
patristic  Hterature  to  the  effect  that  the  Gospel  has  come 
to  us  primarily  from  the  preaching  of  Peter,  through  the 
authorship  of  Mark,  is  borne  out  by  what  we  find  in  the 
study  of  its  contents.  Such  editorial  work  as  discloses 
itself  is  wholly  of  a  minor  importance  (cf.  1:1"  the  Son  of 
God  ";  6  :  30  "  the  apostles  ";  8  :  35;  10  :  29  "  and  the  Gos- 
pels ")  and  for  the  purpose  of  discovering  the  sources  of 
the  Gospel,  negligible. 

^  At  the  same  time  see  Swete,  Mark,  p.  Iviii;  Zahn,  Introduction, 
vol.  ii,  pp.  494-498;  Stanton,  The  Gospels  as  Historical  DocumentSj 
vol.  ii,  pp.  189-191,  for  evidence  of  personal  Petrine  details. 

2  See  particularly  the  notes  on  the  incorporated  apocalj^Dse  of 
ch.  13.  As  to  one  or  two  individual  incidents,  Menzies  (The  Earliest 
Gospel,  p.  28)  considers  that,  on  the  basis  of  the  identification  of  the 
Evangelist  with  the  young  man  of  14  :  5 if.,  certain  facts  in  the  nar- 
rative of  the  Jerusalem  ministry,  given  alone  in  this  Gospel,  may 
have  come  from  Mark  himself  (e.g.  the  mention  of  Alexander  and 
Rufus,  15  :  21,  who  may  have  been  personally  known  to  him).  See 
also  Zahn  (Introduction,  vol.  ii,  pp.  490-494)  as  to  information  due 
to  the  reference  of  14  :  51!.  to  the  author.  Burkitt  (Sources,  p.  97f.) 
suggests  that  the  tale  of  the  Gerasene  demoniac  came  from  sources 
across  the  Lake;  while  the  source  of  the  story  of  Herod  and  the  Bapn 
tist  (6  :  14-29)  is  impossible  to  locate. 


INTRODUCTION 


III.  The  Sources  of  the  Gospel 

1.  The  theory,  however,  that  a  primary  Markan  writing 
underlies  our  present  Gospel  still  persists  and  is  vigorously 
urged  by  many  scholars. 

Its  main  contention  is  that  whatever  Petrine  element 
entered  into  the  original  writing  must  have  been  con- 
spicuously simple,  and  as  such  an  element  is  evident  in  our 
Gospel,  more  or  less  artificially  associated  with  relatively 
complex  material,  it  is  clear  that  in  our  canonical  Gospel 
early  and  later  sources  lie  before  us  which  can  be  separated 
and  to  a  measurable  degree,  at  least,  reconstructed.^ 

2.  That  inequalities  in  the  narrative  exist — shown  at 
times  by  compressions  in  the  sequence  of  events,  at  times 
by  dislocations  of  the  chronological  order;  that  some  of 
the  material  is  colored  with  later  ideas — disclosed  in 
phrases  of  ApostoHc  preaching  and  in  viewpoints  of  the 
Apostolic  Church;  that  inaccuracies  of  statement  can  be 
detected  is  obvious  upon  careful  study  of  the  Gospel's 
contents  (see  above,  ii.  4.).  The  question  is  simply 
whether  these  elements  must  necessarily  have  been  im- 
posed upon  an  original  writing  by  a  later  hand.  For  this, 
no  convincing  proof  has  yet  been  produced.  In  fact,  in 
proportion  as  we  come  clearly  to  understand  the  thought 
of  the  Early  Church,  it  becomes  increasingly  evident  that 
the  primary  interest  of  the  first  disciples  did  not  lie  in  the 
historical  past,  but  in  the  apocalyptic  future  (cf.  i  Thess. 
I  :  gf.).  Their  attention  was  not  given  to  gathering  to- 
gether the  incidents  of  the  Master's  ministry,  but  in  fore- 
casting the  outcome  of  the  Master's  predictions.  Such  a 
simple,  matter-of-fact  review  of  the  Gospel  history  as  is 
assumed  to  be  characteristic  of  this  original  Markan  writ- 
ing would  not  be  the  natural  product  of  the  beginning 
period  of  the  Apostolic  Church;  it  is  the  outcome  of  a  later 

1  For  a  display  and  review  of  the  more  notable  analyses  of  the 
Gospel  material  on  this  theory,  see  Moffatt,  Introduction,  pp.  227-229. 


INTRODUCTION 


time  when  such  faulty  presentations  of  the  sequence  of 
events,  such  inaccuracies  of  statement  and  such  colorings 
of  Jesus'  own  ideas  as  we  have  before  us  in  our  present 
Gospel  were  quite  possible.^ 

3.  It  is  claimed,  however,  that  the  evidence  for  a  pri- 
mary Markan  writing  does  not  lie  so  much  in  such  relatively 
unimportant  elements  of  the  narrative  as  in  its  more  sig- 
nificant features— such  as  a  heightened  supernaturahsm, 
introduced  to  justify  the  Church's  acceptance  of  Jesus  as 
Divine;  a  veiled  and  secretive  Messiahship,  constructed 
to  explain  the  Jewish  rejection  of  Jesus  as  the  Christ;  and 
a  theory  of  salvation,  wrought  into  Jesus'  teaching  to 
make  it  accord  with  the  Pauline  doctrine  of  atone- 
ment.^ ,  .    . 

4.  This  claim  deserves  serious  consideration;  for  it  is 
clear  that  if  it  be  well  founded  and  these  features  be 
eliminated  from  the  Gospel  record,  we  have  left  a  priniary 
story  which  presents  the  life  and  work  of  Jesus  in  a  hght 
wholly  different  from  that  which  has  been  accepted  as 
historical  by  the  Church.  The  question,  of  course,  is 
whether  it  has  ground  on  which  it  can  stand. 

5.  Its  first  contention  that  the  presence  of  exaggerated 
miracles,  such  as  the  healing  of  incurable  disease  (5  :  25- 
34),  the  feeding  of  a  great  multitude  (6  :  35-44),  the  raising 
of  the  dead  (5  :  35-43),  are  later  additions  in  glorification 
of  Jesus'  power  must  clear  itself  of  the  suspicion  of  a  purely 
philosophical  bias.  It  may  be  true  that  if  the  miracles  of 
the  Gospel  times  had  been  wrought  before  the  eyes  of 
trained  observers  of  the  present  day,  we  would  have  had 

1  See  in  general  the  view  held  by  Burkitt  of  the  eschatological  tend- 
encies of  the  Early  Church  {The  Gospel  History  atid  its  Transmission, 
pp.  60,  62,  164  f.;  Sources,  pp.  3-5),  and  the  idea  of  the  early  origin 
of  the  apocalyptic  element  in  the  Gospel  narratives  presented  by 
Streeter  {Oxford  Studies  in  the  Synoptic  Problem,  pp.  425-430).     _ 

2  See,  for  instance,  one  of  the  latest  and  most  favorably  received 
theories— that  of  WendHng,  as  given  in  his  earlier  pamphlet,  Ur- 
markus  (1905)  and  in  his  later  and  larger  work,  Die  Entstehung  des 
Marcus  Evangeliums  (1908). 

13 


INTRODUCTION 


a  different  interpretation  of  them;  ^  but  the  facts  reported 
would  have  been  the  same.  There  would  be  no  need  of 
assuming  a  later  date  for  such  versions  of  them  as  are 
given;  while  we  may  not  forget  that  of  at  least  one  of 
these  '^heightened  miracles" — the  reappearance  of  Jesus 
to  his  disciples  after  his  death — an  interpretation  must  be 
given  even  by  modern  scholars  which  will  account  for 
the  present  existence  of  the  Christian  Church. 

6.  The  assertion  that  Jesus'  concealment  of  his  Messiah- 
ship  from  the  crowds  that  followed  him  in  his  ministry  and 
from  the  populace  at  large  is  a  later  reconstruction  of  the 
narrative,  in  order  to  explain  how  it  was  possible  that  the 
people  of  God  did  not  recognize  him  as  the  Christ,  fails 
to  take  account  of  the  religious  situation  in  which  Jesus 
found  himself  in  his  ministry.  The  apocalyptic  hope  of 
Judaism  in  Jesus'  time  had  in  view  a  coming  kingdom 
which  was  to  be  ushered  in  by  God,  when  the  time  for  the 
redemption  of  his  people  was  ripe,  and  to  be  ruled  over 
by  the  Messiah,  when  at  last  it  was  estabhshed.  To  bring 
it  to  its  establishment  was  not  the  function  of  the  Messiah. 
In  fact,  there  was  to  be  no  Messiah  until  the  kingdom  was 
come.  There  was  thus  no  Messiahship  for  Jesus  to  pro- 
claim while  he  was  announcing  the  kingdom  to  be  "at 
hand."  As  God  knew  him  and  as  the  demons  recognized 
him  he  may  have  been  the  Messiah,  even  in  this  prepara- 
tory stage;  but  to  the  people  at  large  this  was  not  possible. 
Unless  he  was  to  yield  to  the  popular  nationalism  and  lower 
his  spiritual  office  to  the  role  of  a  poHtical  pretender,  Mes- 
siahship was  not  for  him  to  announce  or  to  allow  to  be 
announced  until  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  had  been  real- 
ized in  the  hearts  of  men.  His  concealment  of  it  during 
his  early  ministry;  his  acknowledgment  of  it  to  his  chosen 
disciples  after  his  spiritual  instruction  of  them  during  the 
period  of  retirement  had  brought  them  to  recognize  it  for 
themselves;  his  judicial  assumption  of  it  at  the  crisis  of  the 

^  Sanday,  Article,  Jesus  Christ,  in  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  vol.  ii, 
p.  625. 

14 


INTRODUCTION 


final  ministry  in  Jerusalem — these  constitute  a  perfectly 
natural  development  of  the  Messianic  feature  of  the  nar- 
rative necessitated  by  the  religious  thinking  of  the  day.^ 

7.  The  final  claim  that  into  the  teachings  of  Jesus  has 
been  introduced  a  theory  of  salvation  in  agreement  with 
the  Pauline  theology  begs  the  question  as  to  whether 
Jesus'  idea  of  salvation  must  necessarily  have  been  differ- 
ent from  Paul's.  Confessedly,  there  is  in  Jesus'  teachings 
a  definite  statement  of  redemption  through  the  sacrifice  of 
himself,  and  it  is  quite  apparent  that  this  is  Paul's  way  of 
thinking.  The  only  question  is  as  to  whether  it  could 
have  been  Jesus'  way  of  thinking  also.  If  Jesus'  concep- 
tion of  his  mission  w^as  that  it  was  merely  to  champion  the 
unchurched  and  the  outcast  of  Judaism — that  it  was 
nothing  more  than  a  " religio-ethical  and  humanitarian" 
undertaking,'"  then  there  is  no  room  in  his  teaching  for  a 
doctrine  of  atonement  and  the  difference  between  the  his- 
torical Christ  and  the  Christ  of  Paul's  experience  is  un- 
thinkably  wide.  But  the  question  is  whether  at  this  point 
of  the  significance  of  Jesus'  death  Paul's  experience  may 
not  have  been  as  truly  in  accord  with  the  mind  of  the 
Master  as  was  his  Gentile  activity  in  the  matter  of  the 
purpose  of  the  Master's  mission  to  the  world.  Within 
nascent  Christianity  the  development  of  the  understand- 
ing of  Christ  and  his  work  was  as  natural  as  it  was  within 
the  embryonic  discipleship  of  his  Ministry,  and  unless  the 
Christianity  that  has  taken  hold  of  the  world  can  be  ac- 
counted for  without  the  Cross,  then  the  announcement 
that  the  Son  of  Man  came  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for 
many  (10  :  45)  is  as  historical  a  part  of  Jesus'  teaching  as 
it  is  a  vital  part  of  Paul's  experience. 

8.  It  would  seem,  therefore,  from  every  point  of  view, 
that  the  existence  of  a  primary  Markan  writing  underlying 
our  present  Gospel  fails  of  proof;  so  that  the  Gospel,  prac- 
tically as  it  stands  before  us,  comes  from  Mark's  hand. 


^  See  Burkitt,  Sources^  p.  65. 

2  Bacon,  Gospel  Story,  pp.  xxxviii,  104,  107,  158. 

15 


INTRODUCTION 


IV.  The  Relation  of  Mark  to  Matthew  and  Luke 

1.  There  remains  to  be  considered  the  Hterary  relation 
of  our  Gospel  to  its  fellow  Synoptics — Matthew  and 
Luke — particularly  with  reference  to  the  query  whether 
our  Gospel  may  not  have  existed  in  one  or  more  editions, 
revised  perhaps  by  the  hand  of  Mark  himself. 

2.  From  even  a  cursory  study  of  the  first  three  Gospels, 
it  is  clear  that,  while  they  are  individual  accounts  of  a 
commonly  received  story,  they  are  not  wholly  independent 
accounts.  There  are  portions  of  the  narrative  where  they 
are  so  closely  in  agreement  as  to  necessitate  the  conclusion, 
either  that  they  have  all  been  derived  from  a  common 
written  source,  or  that  two  of  them  have  derived  their 
accounts  in  common  from  the  third;  while  there  are  other 
portions  where  two  of  the  accounts  are  so  verbally  parallel 
as  to  compel  the  inference,  either  that  they  have  drawn 
their  material  from  a  common  document,  or  that  one  has 
used  the  account  of  the  other. 

3.  Upon  closer  study  of  these  accounts,  however,  it  be- 
comes clear  that  Mark  stands  in  a  peculiar  relation  to 
Matthew  and  Luke.  Of  his  sixteen  chapters  there  are 
less  than  thirty  verses  which  are  not  to  be  found  repro- 
duced, more  or  less  verbally,  in  the  narratives  of  both,  or 
of  one  or  the  other  of  his  fellow  Evangelists.  Further  than 
this,  where  Matthew  or  Luke  differ  from  the  narrative  of 
Mark,  the  reason  for  their  deviation  is  obvious;  where 
Mark  differs  from  either  Matthew  or  Luke  a  reason  for 
his  procedure  is  not  forthcoming.  Even  in  the  arrange- 
ment of  the  narrative,  Matthew  and  Luke's  digressions 
from  his  sequence  are  understandable,  while  his  digression 
from  either  of  theirs  seems  to  have  no  explanation. 

4.  When  investigation  is  made  from  another  point  of 
view,  it  is  found  that  the  three  narratives  arrange  them- 
selves in  the  following  groups — a  three-fold  group,  where 
the  account  is  found  in  all  the  narratives;  a  two-fold  group, 
where  the  account  is  found  in  two  of  the  three — either  in 

16 


INTRODUCTION 


Matthew  and  Mark,  or  in  Matthew  and  Luke,  or  in  Mark 
and  Luke;  a  single  group,  where  the  account  is  found  but 
in  one — either  in  Matthew,  or  in  Mark,  or  in  Luke.  On 
a  study  of  the  three-fold  group,  it  is  discovered  that  Mat- 
thew and  Mark  agree  against  Luke  and  Mark  and  Luke 
agree  against  Matthew  far  more  frequently  and  exten- 
sively than  Matthew  and  Luke  agree  against  Mark.  In 
fact,  the  agreements  of  Matthew  and  Luke  against  Mark 
are  confined  to  changes  which  in  no  way  affect  the  sense 
or  meaning  of  the  record,  save  in  the  case  of  less  than  forty 
words  throughout  the  entire  extent  of  these  groups.  Even 
more  striking  results  emerge  in  a  study  of  the  order  of 
events  within  this  three-fold  group.  Matthew  and  Mark 
agree  against  Luke  in  the  location  of  two  sections;  Mark 
and  Luke  agree  against  Matthew  in  some  thirteen  sections. 
Matthew  and  Luke  do  not  agree  against  Mark  in  a  single 
instance. 

5.  From  all  these  facts  criticism  has  come  to  the  very 
general  conclusion  that  Mark's  narrative  and  order  of 
events  form  the  basis  for  the  narratives  and  order  of  Mat- 
thew and  Luke — in  other  words,  that  when  they  wrote 
their  gospels,  Matthew  and  Luke  had  before  them  and 
used  in  their  wTiting  the  Gospel  of  Mark  substantially  in 
the  form  in  w^hich  it  lies  before  us  to-day.^ 

6.  It  is  ob\dous  that  this  conclusion  confirms  that  which 
has  already  been  reached  regarding  the  existence  of  a 
primary  Markan  wTiting,  underlying  our  present  Gospel 
of  Mark  (see  above,  III,  8).  For  if  the  Gospel  w^hich 
Matthew  and  Luke  have  so  completely  reproduced  in 
their  narratives  were  not  our  present  Gospel  of  Mark,  but 
a  previous  Markan  wTiting  which  was  used  by  all  three, 
then  it  would  be  impossible  to  account  for  the  fact  that 

^  For  a  scientific  study  of  the  principles  of  literary  criticism  and 
their  equally  scientific  application  to  the  literary  relations  of  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,  the  reader  is  commended  to  the  work  of  Professor 
Ernest  DeWitt  Burton,  Some  Principles  of  Literary  Criticism  and 
their  Application  to  the  Synoptic  Problem,  Chicago,  1904. 

17 


INTRODUCTION 


Matthew  and  Luke  have  hardly  ever  copied  it  in  agree- 
ment against  our  present  Mark,  except  on  the  theory  that 
it  has  been  so  completely  reproduced  in  the  present  Gospel 
of  Mark  as  to  make  his  present  Gospel  identical  with  it — 
in  other  words,  to  show  that  there  w^as  no  such  primary 
Markan  writing  different  from  the  present  Markan  Gospel 
as  we  possess  it.^ 

7.  We  have  not  considered,  however,  all  the  literary 
facts  presented  to  us  by  these  Gospels.  As  was  noted 
above  (4),  some  of  the  groups  into  which  the  three  nar- 
ratives divide  themselves  show  that  not  only  do  Matthew 
and  Mark  have  material  which  Luke  has  omitted  and  Mark 
and  Luke  have  material  which  Matthew  has  omitted,  but 
that  Matthew  and  Luke  have  material  which  Mark  has 
omitted.  Can  this  material  omitted  by  Mark  have  pos- 
sibly belonged  to  a  primary  Markan  writing? 

8.  There  will  be  little  doubt  as  to  the  answer  to  be  given 
to  this  query  when  we  consider  the  character  of  this  ma- 
terial. It  consists  largely  in  sayings  and  discourses  of 
Jesus  with  more  or  less  narrative  setting,  and  is  marked  in 
its  identity  of  form  of  construction,  wording  of  phrase  and 
order  of  sentence.  Its  lack  of  agreement  is  in  the  locations 
in  which  it  is  placed  in  the  narratives  of  the  two  Evan- 
gelists— there  being  but  two  instances  in  which  it  is  sim- 
ilarly placed,  viz. :  the  preaching  of  John  the  Baptist  (Matt. 

3  :  7-10,  12  =  Lk.  3  :  7-9,  17)  and  the  Temptation  (Matt. 

4  : 3-1 1  =  Lk.  4  :  3-13).  That  this  material  belonged  to 
a  primary  Markan  wTiting  and  was  as  statedly  discarded 
in  the  composition  of  our  present  Gospel  of  Mark  as  it 
was  statedly  appropriated  in  the  composition  of  our  pres- 
ent Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Luke  is,  not  only  highly  im- 
probable in  itself  as  a  literary  procedure,  but  is  rendered 
impossible  by  the  fact  that  it  came  itself  from  more  than 
one  document. 

9.  Without  going  into  the  details  of  the  argument  by 
which  this  conclusion  is  reached,  it  will  be  sufficient  to 

1  Burkitt,  Gospel  History,  pp.  40-58. 
18 


INTRODUCTION 


state  that,  as  to  the  larger  part  of  this  common  material, 
Matthew  has  distributed  it  through  his  narrative  of  the 
Galilean  and  Jerusalem  ministries,  including  it  in  the  long 
discourses  peculiar  to  his  Gospel,  where  it  appears  as  an 
interrupting  and  discordant  element;  while  Luke  has  segre- 
gated it  in  the  ten  chapters  which  give  his  record  of  what  is 
called  the  Perean  ministry.^  It  is  clear  from  these  dif- 
ferent ways  in  which  this  material  has  been  handled  by 
these  two  Evangelists,  that  it  represents  a  document  dis- 
tinct from  Mark  or  any  form  of  Mark.  As  to  the  smaller 
portion  of  this  common  material,  it  is  placed  by  both 
Matthew  and  Luke  in  their  respective  records  of  the 
ministry  of  the  Baptist  and  the  Galilean  ministry  of  Jesus 
and,  though  differently  located  in  these  records,  it  is  ar- 
ranged by  both  Evangelists  in  the  same  general  sequence  of 
events.  Upon  closer  study,  it  is  evident  that  this  smaller 
portion  of  the  common  material  does  not  come  from  the 
same  document  that  furnished  the  larger  portion.  The 
narrative  element  in  it  is  of  a  much  more  vivid  character, 
while  its  Hterary  style  is  of  a  much  finer  quality.  In  fact, 
when  to  this  briefer  material  common  to  Matthew  and 
Luke  there  is  added  from  Luke's  record  of  the  Galilean 
ministry  other  material  closely  associated  with  it  in  its 
vividness  of  narration  and  its  high  quality  of  style,  it  is 
apparent  that  we  have  evidence  of  another  document  used 
by  Luke,  but  in  this  case  incorporated  into  his  record  of 
the  Galilean  ministry ;  while  the  excerpts  taken  from  it  by 
Matthew  are  confined  to  the  same  period  in  which  it  is 
used  by  Luke — evidently  because,  unlike  the  document 
constituting  Luke's  Perean  record,  it  indicated  in  itself  the 
period  to  which  it  belonged. 

lo.  From  the  viewpoint  of  hterary  criticism,  it  is  not 

^  While  Luke  has  incorporated  this  document  bodily  into  his  narra- 
tive, in  which  it  constitutes  his  Perean  Chapters  (9  :  51-18  :  14  and 
19  :  1-28— the  passage  18  :  15-43  being  an  interpolation  from  Mark), 
Matthew  has  given  general  excerpts  from  it,  chiefly  of  the  sayings  of 
Jesus,  which  he  has  used  to  develop  the  larger  discourses  of  the  Master. 

19 


INTRODUCTION 


possible  that  either  of  these  two  documents,  representing 
together  the  material  common  to  Matthew  and  Luke, 
formed  part  of  a  primary  Markan  writing;  for,  not  only, 
as  has  already  been  said  (3,  above),  is  there  no  explana- 
tion of  the  stated  omission  of  their  material  from  our 
present  Gospel  of  Mark,  but  in  the  case  of  the  larger  docu- 
ment, there  is  no  assignable  reason  for  the  fact  that  in 
such  a  case  both  Matthew  and  Luke  would  have  treated  a 
portion  of  this  primary  writing  in  a  way  so  distinctively 
different  from  that  in  which  they  treated  the  writing  as  a 
whole — Matthew  omitting  its  narrative  features  and  Luke 
congesting  the  order  of  its  events  in  one  period  of  the 
ministry.  If  it  be  said  that  this  objection  does  not  affect 
their  treatment  of  the  material  of  the  smaller  document- 
that,  not  only  has  Matthew  here  reproduced  the  narrative 
features  of  the  material,  but  that  both  Matthew  and  Luke 
have  distributed  the  material  in  an  orderly  sequence  of 
events  within  the  period  of  the  Baptist's  ministry  and  the 
Galilean  ministry  of  Jesus,  while  the  character  of  the  nar- 
rative discloses  the  vividness  which  is  characteristic  of 
the  Markan  Gospel,  it  is  nevertheless  fatally  against  the 
theory  that  this  document  belonged  to  a  primary  Markan 
writing  that  a  considerable  portion  of  its  material,  as 
presented  by  Luke,  displaces  similar  material  in  our  present 
Gospel  of  Mark  (Lk.  5  :  i-ii  [Mk.  i  :  16-20];  Lk.  4  :  16-30 
[Mk.  6  :  1-6];  Lk.  7  :  36-50  [Mk.  14  : 3-9])— in  other  words, 
that  it  was  not  reproduced  from  another  writing  of  Mark's, 
but  from  a  writing  wholly  separate  and  distinct  from 
Mark's.  From  these  facts  it  would  seem  as  though  there 
was  no  possible  basis  for  positing  the  existence  of  a  primi- 
tive Markan  writing  from  which  our  present  Gospel  of 
Mark  has  been  derived. 

II.  There  remains  but  a  single  query:  Recognizing  the 
fact  that  both  Matthew  and  Luke  made  common  use  of 
Mark,  is  it  possible  that  the  Markan  material  possessed 
by  one  of  these  two  Evangehsts  and  not  by  the  other 
means  that  one  of  them  had  a  copy  of  our  present  Gospel 


INTRODUCTION 


of  Mark  which  was  not  used  by  the  other?  There  is  a  very 
significant  section  of  Mark's  Gospel  (6  :  45-8  :  26)  which 
has  been  substantially  reproduced  by  Matthew,  but  is  not 
found  at  all  in  Luke.  Could  this  have  belonged  to  the 
copy  of  Mark  which  was  used  by  Matthew  but  not  to  that 
which  was  used  by  Luke?  It  is  claimed  that  only  so  can 
the  omission  of  such  a  large  section  be  accounted  for.^  If 
so,  it  would  necessitate  that  Matthew  followed  Luke  in 
order  of  composition — a  sequence  for  which  Harnack  ar- 
gues from  other  data.^  It  would,  however,  oblige  us  also 
to  assume  that  this  section  of  the  second  Gospel  was  added 
to  the  earlier  copy  of  the  Gospel  by  Mark  himself;  since 
its  uniformity  in  language  and  style  with  the  rest  of  the 
Gospel  precludes  the  possibility  of  its  having  been  in- 
serted by  one  who  was  distinct  from  the  author  of  the 
book  as  a  whole. ^  This,  too,  is  not  an  absolutely  impos- 
sible procedure.  But  the  question  arises  whether  the 
omission  is  not  better  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  the 
motive  for  the  period  of  retirement  and  instruction  con- 
tained in  these  chapters  of  Mark  would  so  lack  in  its  ap- 
peal to  the  historian  Luke — especially  when  account  is 
taken  of  his  tendency  toward  a  Gentile  broadening  of 
Jesus'  ministry — that  there  would  be  no  inclination  on  his 
part  to  incorporate  them  in  his  narrative.  Had  these 
omitted  chapters  recorded  an  organized  ministry  through- 
out this  Gentile  region  on  Jesus'  part,  they  would  have 
been  eagerly  reproduced  by  Luke;  as  this,  however,  is 
expressly  what  they  exclude,  it  is  not  difficult  to  under- 
stand why  he  passed  them  by.^ 

12.  In  the  narrative  of  the  Passion  and  Resurrection 
there  is  a  considerable  portion  which  Luke  has  peculiar 

^  Wright,  Synopsis,  2d  Ed.,  p.  Iviii;  Gospel  of  St.  Luke,  p.  83. 

2  Date  of  Acts  mid  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  Ch.  Ill,  §§  6,  8. 

'  For  details  of  the  argument  that  this  section  forms  an  integral 
part  of  Mark's  Gospel,  see  Hawkins  in  Oxford  Studies,  pp.  63-66. 

*  Ibid.,  pp.  72-74.  For  another  theory  as  to  Luke's  reason  for 
omitting  this  section,  see  Burton,  Principles  of  Literary  Criticism^ 
p.  45- 


INTRODUCTION 


to  himself  and  not  in  common  with  Matthew.  Were  this 
material  present  in  Mark,  it  might  raise  the  question 
whether,  assuming  that  Matthew  was  written  before 
Luke,  he  possessed  an  earlier  copy  of  Mark  not  used  by 
Luke.  But,  not  only  is  this  material  of  Luke's  not  present 
in  Mark,  but  there  is  an  equally  considerable  portion  of 
Matthew's  Passion  and  Resurrection  narrative  which  is 
not  to  be  found  either  in  Luke  or  in  Mark — showing  that 
the  question  which  confronts  us  in  this  part  of  the  Gospel 
story  is,  not  whether  there  existed  an  earher  copy  of  Mark 
which  one  of  the  other  Evangelists  used  and  the  other  did 
not  have,  but  whether  Matthew  and  Luke  did  not  each 
have  and  use  a  source  distinct  from  Mark  and  pecuHar  to 
himself. 

13.  As  is  well  known,  there  is  a  large  amount  of  material 
distributed  through  Matthew  which  is  peculiar  to  that 
Gospel.  It  consists  of  long  discourses  and  shorter  sayings 
of  Jesus,  derived  from  a  document  which  was  most  likely 
a  collection  of  Jesus'  utterances.  The  existence  of  such  a 
document  is  credited  to  us  by  the  reference  which  Papias 
makes  to  a  book  of  ''the  sayings"  (Logia)  written  by 
Matthew  in  the  Hebrew  (Aramaic)  dialect.-^  Whether  this 
document  was  used  also  by  Mark,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that 
this  Evangelist  records  so  few  of  Jesus'  teachings,  or  even 
by  Luke,  who  records  so  much  of  this  discourse  material, 
is  a  question  which  at  present  is  debated  by  scholars,  and, 
as  far  as  Mark  is  concerned,  does  not  affect  the  primary 
character  of  his  Gospel  as  we  have  it  before  us  to-day.^ 

14.  It  would  seem,  therefore,  from  all  these  facts  that 
there  is  no  evidence,  amounting  to  proof,  that,  while  both 
Matthew  and  Luke  used  what  we  know  as  our  Gospel  of 
Mark,  one  of  them  used  an  earher  and  simpler  edition  of 

^  Eusebius,  History,  iii,  39. 

2  For  a  discussion  of  the  question  as  to  Mark's  use  of  this  docu- 
ment, see  Streeter,  Oxford  Studies,  pp.  165-183;  for  a  discussion  of 
the  use  of  this  document  by  either  Mark  or  Luke,  see  Burton,  Prin- 
ciples of  Literary  Criticism,  pp.  35-41. 


INTRODUCTION 


it  than  was  used  by  the  other.  The  Gospel  of  Mark,  then, 
as  it  exists  in  its  present  canonical  form — apart  from  a  few 
unimportant  editorial  additions  (see  above,  II,  8)— is  the 
Gospel  writing  to  which  Papias  refers  in  his  statement  pre- 
served for  us  in  Eusebius'  History  (above,  II,  2,  note  [2] ). 

V.  The  Date  of  Mark 

I.  We  come  thus  to  the  question  as  to  when  this  Gospel 
of  Mark  was  written.  If  we  recur  to  Papias'  basal  testi- 
mony (above,  II,  2),  we  find  that  it  does  not  necessarily 
imply  that  this  Gospel  writing  of  Mark  was  accomphshed 
after  Peter's  death.  Fairly  interpreted,  it  means  merely 
that  it  was,  not  a  reporting  of  the  Apostle's  discourses  as 
they  were  being  delivered,  but  a  wTiting  down  of  what 
was  remembered  of  them  after  they  had  ceased  to  be 
given.  Such  a  process,  of  course,  would  be  as  well  satisfied 
by  the  fact  that  Mark  was  no  longer  in  Peter's  company, 
as  by  the  fact  that  Peter  was  no  longer  aUve.  If,  how^ever, 
as  has  been  already  pointed  out  (above,  II,  5),  Mark  com- 
posed his  Gospel  in  Rome,  in  order  that  those  to  whom 
the  Apostle  had  ministered  might  have  in  some  narrative 
form  the  incidents  of  the  Gospel  story  which  had  been 
scattered  through  his  discourses,  then,  on  the  supposition 
that  the  interpretation  of  the  apocalyptic  material  of 
Ch.  13  given  in  the  notes  is  correct,  the  composition  of  the 
Gospel  is  almost  necessarily  brought  down  to  a  date  not 
long  preceding  the  catastrophe  of  70  a.d.  and,  therefore, 
some  considerable  time  after  the  traditional  date  of  Peter's 
martyrdom  (64  a.d.).^  At  all  events,  it  is  to  be  assigned 
to  the  later  rather  than  to  the  earUer  years  of  the  sixth 
decade. 

1  Though  the  view  regarding  the  apocalyptic  discourse  advanced 
in  the  notes  to  Ch.  13  is  of  the  same  general  character  as  that  held 
by  Stanton  {Gospels  as  Historical  Documents,  vol.  ii,  p.  117),  it  is 
nevertheless  different  and  calls  for  a  later  date  of  composition  than 
60  A.  D.,  which  he  assigns  to  it  (p.  120).  At  the  same  time,  it  neces- 
sitates a  date  early  enough  to  allow  for  the  document  having  secured 
such  currency  in  the  church  as  to  commend  it  to  Mark's  use. 

23 


INTRODUCTION 


VI.  The  Historical  Value  of  Mark 

1.  Obviously,  it  is  not  a  collection  of  a  few  unrelated 
anecdotes  of  the  Gospel  story,  embellished  with  legendary 
and  mythical  anecdotes,  or  padded  out  with  doctrinal 
polemics.  It  lies  before  us,  on  the  whole,  an  intelligible 
outline  of  a  consistently  developed  life  and  work,  which, 
in  perfect  accord  with  the  pohtical  and  religious  conditions 
of  the  time,  was  only  gradually  understood  by  its  sym- 
pathetic followers  and  to  its  enemies  remained  an  irra- 
tional challenge  of  self-assumption  to  the  end. 

2.  Here  and  there  we  find  in  it  inaccuracies  of  statement, 
born  of  the  thirty  or  more  years  by  which  it  was  removed 
from  the  events  which  it  records;  we  come  across  phrasings 
which  belong  to  the  ApostoHc  preaching  with  which  Mark 
was  familiar;  there  are  even  points  where  the  later  hand 
of  an  editor  is  evident.  But  none  of  these  blemishes  af- 
fects the  historical  consistency  of  the  narrative  as  a  whole. 
The  supernatural  is  present  in  the  story;  but  it  is  not  im- 
posed upon  it  in  a  spirit  of  a  later  superstition;  it  is  there 
as  naturally  interpreted  by  those  who  saw  it,  whether  that 
interpretation  be  held  to-day  as  scientific  or  not.  The 
divine  is  present  in  the  claims  which  Jesus  centres  upon 
himself;  but  it  is  not  there  as  a  later  dogmatic  dress  which 
has  been  thrown  over  the  simple  ethical  and  social  con- 
ceptions which  he  had  of  his  mission.  Read  the  Gospel 
record  as  a  later  legend  and  myth  recast  in  the  form  of 
history,  and  it  becomes  unintelhgible.  Conceive  of  Jesus 
as  a  mere  ethical  and  social  reformer,  whose  claim  to  re- 
deem the  sin  of  the  world  and  to  command  its  religious 
life  is  a  dogmatic  conception  of  a  later  age,  and  the  course 
of  his  mission  as  recounted  in  the  narrative  is  absurd. 

3.  On  the  other  hand,  when  we  recognize  the  Gospel  of 
Mark  as  a  sober  record  of  the  facts  of  Jesus'  message  and 
ministry  as  they  occurred,  we  begin  to  realize  why  this 
particular  Gospel  occupied  so  relatively  small  a  place  in 
the  estimation  of  post  apostolic  literature.    It  lacked,  not 

24 


INTRODUCTION 


merely  those  elements  of  literary  style  which  ranked  it 
below  its  companion  Synoptics,  but  those  features  of 
doctrinal  interpretation  which  would  interest  the  age  in 
which  the  Church  Fathers  wrought  and  wrote.  It  was 
nothing  but  the  simple  story  which  had  long  ago  been 
known  and  told  abroad;  but  in  this  it  has  for  us  its  supreme 
historical  worth. ^  With  the  facts  of  this  simple  story  of 
Jesus'  ministry  and  message  tallied  the  simple  faith  which 
the  Early  Church  yielded  to  Jesus  himself.  But  the  faith 
did  not  create  the  facts;  it  was  the  facts  that  gave  birth  to 
the  faith,  and  just  because,  as  that  faith  grew  complicated 
through  the  controversies  of  a  developed  theology,  it  lost 
interest  in  the  facts,  it  is  to  these  facts  that  it  has  ever  had 
to  return,  in  order  to  recover  the  strength  and  the  power 
with  which  it  began. 

4.  If  to  these  impressions  is  added  the  conclusion  which 
criticism  has  justified — that  the  story  told  in  this  Gospel 
has  a  vital  relation  to  the  personal  participation  in  its 
events  on  the  part  of  one  of  Jesus'  intimate  disciples,  there 
comes  to  us  an  even  deeper  conviction  of  the  historical 
worth  of  what  it  narrates;  ^  for  if  this  story  is  not  an  illusion 
w^hich  has  arisen  out  of  the  faith  of  the  early  disciples, 
much  less  can  it  be  an  illusion  created  by  the  faith  of  any 
one  of  them.  What  Peter  held  in  his  faith  in  Jesus  was 
held  in  a  faith  which,  in  spite  of  all  their  many  inde- 
pendencies of  view,  he  had  in  common  with  them  all.  If 
the  Gospel  story  of  Mark  was  not  the  product  of  the  faith 
of  the  entire  Church,  it  is  not  thinkable  that  it  was  the 
product  of  the  faith  of  one  of  the  members  of  the  Church, 
however  prominent  he  may  have  been;  for  then  his  faith 
must  have  created,  not  only  its  own  historical  illusions, 
but  the  historical  illusions  on  which  rested  the  belief  of 
the  Church  at  large;  for  this  Gospel  became  the  accepted, 
history  for  the  Christian  discipleship  of  the  Apostolic  Age, 

1  Burkitt,  Gospel  History,  ch.  iii,  Sources,  ch.  iii;  Menzies,  The 
Earliest  Gospel,  pp.  4-19. 

2  Denney,  Jesus  and  the  Gospel,  pp.  159-168. 

25 


INTRODUCTION 


and  whatever  leadership  may  be  claimed  for  Peter  among 
the  early  disciples,  there  were  too  many  in  this  discipleship 
who  could  have  checked  up  the  illusions  of  such  a  self- 
created  story  of  Jesus'  life  and  work,  to  make  it  possible 
for  him  through  it  to  become  the  founder  of  the  Christian 
faith.  If  Paul  did  not  come  to  his  belief  in  the  resurrection 
of  Jesus  through  the  unverifiable  illusions  of  the  early 
disciples  at  large  (i  Cor.  15  :  i-8),  it  is  not  likely  that  he 
was  persuaded  to  it  by  those  of  one  of  their  number,  and 
Paul  was  but  a  type  of  the  bigotedly  hostile  mind  that 
had  to  be  persuaded  by  fact  to  forsake  an  ingrained  un- 
belief for  a  life  constraining  faith. 

VII.  The  Text 

1 .  The  only  serious  question  as  to  the  text  of  the  Gospel 
is  raised  by  the  fact  that  in  the  ancient  MSS.  and  Versions 
the  concluding  chapter  appears  in  three  very  differing 
forms.  In  the  larger  num^ber  of  these  documents  we  have 
the  longer  form  presented  to  us  in  the  Authorized  Version; 
in  the  smaller  number  we  have  the  shorter  form  given  in 
the  Revised  Version,  which  omits  everything  after  verse  8; 
in  a  few  we  have  an  intermediate  form,  which  substitutes 
for  vs.  9-20  of  the  longer  form  a  short  paragraph,  consist- 
ing of  the  following  two  sentences:  And  they  reported 
briefly  to  Peter  and  those  in  his  company  all  the  things  com- 
manded. And  after  these  things  Jesus  himself  also  sent 
forth  through  them  from  the  East  even  to  the  West  the  holy 
and  incorruptible  message  of  eternal  salvation.  Some  of 
these  latter  manuscripts  contain  both  forms  as  alternative 
endings;  while  the  text  of  the  recently  discovered  Freer 
manuscript  contains  an  extended  variant  of  the  longer 
form  (cf.  Biblical  World,  1908,  pp.  138-142,  218-226). 

2.  There  is  Httle  difficulty,  how^ever,  in  deciding  among 
these  different  forms.  The  intermediate  form  has  no  manu- 
script evidence  of  value  and  is  wholly  discredited  by  its 
character  and  the  uncertainty  of  its  use;  while  the  longer 
form,  although  it  has  an  overwhelming  majority  of  docu- 

26 


INTRODUCTION 


mentary  witnesses  in  its  favor,  supplemented  by  the  writ- 
ings of  Irenaeus,  who  accepts  it  without  suspicion,  and  by 
those  of  Justin  Martyr  and  earher  still  by  Barnabas  and 
Hernias,  who  seem  to  know  of  it,  though  not  necessarily  as 
part  of  the  Gospel,  yet  this  weight  of  numbers  is  more  than 
olTset  by  the  testimony  of  the  two  oldest  Uncials  (Sinaitic 
and  Vatican)  and  of  one  of  the  two  earliest  forms  of  the 
Syriac  Version  (Sinaitic  Syriac),  all  of  w^hich  close  the 
Gospel  at  verse  8.  In  addition  to  this,  is  the  significant 
silence  of  Patristic  Literature,  from  Irenaeus  to  Eusebius, 
as  to  anything  following  verse  8  and  the  positive  statement 
on  the  part  of  Eusebius,  repeated  later  by  Jerome,  that 
this  was  the  form  existent,  not  only  in  almost  all  the  MSS. 
of  his  day,  but  in  all  that  were  considered  the  most  ac- 
curate. 

3.  This  external  evidence  is  confirmed  by  a  study  of 
verses  9-20  of  the  longer  form.  Their  connection  with 
the  preceding  verses  is  hopelessly  artificial.  Not  only  does 
verse  9  needlessly  take  the  narrative  back  to  verse  i,  but 
there  is  nothing  to  explain  how  the  great  fear  recorded  in 
verse  8  as  having  paralyzed  the  speech  of  the  women  trans- 
formed itself  into  the  message  of  verse  10;  nor  is  there  any 
mention  of  an  appearing  of  Jesus  in  Galilee  which  would 
be  naturally  expected  from  the  promise  of  verse  7  (cf.  per 
contra  Matt.  28  :  16,  as  related  to  28  17).  Further  than 
this,  the  style  of  these  verses  is  strikingly  at  variance  with 
that  of  the  rest  of  the  Gospel.  It  is  not  that  of  a  vivid 
narrative  which  so  characterizes  the  writing  of  this 
Evangelist,  but  that  of  a  summarizing  statement,  in- 
fluenced apparently  by  confessional  and  catechetical  usage. 
Also,  the  language  shows  itself  in  several  instances  to  be 
wholly  foreign  to  Mark,  and  in  some  of  them  to  the  entire 
New  Testament  {e.g.  "the  first  day  of  the  week,"  ver.  9, 
the  original  of  which  is  unique  in  the  New  Testament; 
''the  Lord  [Jesus],"  vs.  19,  20,  a  term  never  elsewhere  ap- 
plied to  the  Master,  either  in  Mark  or  in  Matthew  and 
only  rarely  in  Luke  and  John;  also  the  original  terms  for 


INTRODUCTION 


going  and  walking  [vs.  lo,  12,  15],  accompanying  [ver.  17], 
deadly,  hurting  [ver.  18],  working  with  and  confirming 
[ver.  20]  are  all  strange  to  Mark  and  some  of  them  to  the 
New  Testament). 

4.  What  was  the  origin  of  this  longer  form  may  be  im- 
possible to  state.  From  an  Armenian  MS.  recently  dis- 
covered/ it  would  seem  that  it  came  from  the  hand  of 
Aristion  the  "presbyter" — doubtless  identical  with  one  of 
the  authorities  upon  whom  Papias  depended  for  his  in- 
formation; while  the  presence  of  an  extended  variant  of 
this  longer  form  in  the  significant  Freer  MS.  of  the  fifth 
century — the  interpolated  portion  of  which  was  known  to 
Jerome — may  indicate  that  these  verses  were  not  written 
primarily  to  furnish  an  ending  for  the  Gospel,  but  were 
taken  from  a  larger  work  to  serve  this  purpose.  But 
whether  Aristion  was  the  author  of  this  larger  work,  or 
the  editor  of  what  was  borrowed  from  it  for  this  ending,  or 
whether  this  ending  was  taken  from  the  famous  work  of 
Papias — Aristion  being  indicated  as  the  source  of  the  par- 
ticular information  which  these  verses  contain,  is,  in  the 
present  stage  of  the  discussion,  beyond  definite  determina- 
tion. ^ 

5.  Whether  this  short  form — ending  at  verse  8 — was  the 
form  given  the  conclusion  of  his  narrative  by  Mark  him- 
self, or  whether,  as  the  Gospel  left  his  hand  it  had  a  longer 
ending  which  in  the  first  years  of  the  Gospel's  usage  was 
lost  or  removed,  may  be  difficult  to  decide;  though  it  is 
easier  to  account  for  the  addition  of  these  other  endings,  if 
it  never  had  any  of  its  own  than  for  the  substitution  of 
these  for  that  which  it  originally  had.  It  may  be  that 
Mark  intended  to  add  an  extended  narrative  covering  the 
estabhshing  of  that  Gospel  the  beginning  of  which  he  had 
narrated  in  his  record  so  far — especially  if  he  was  conscious 

1  Conybeare,  Expositor,  Oct.  1893,  pp.  241-254,  Dec.  1895,  pp.  401- 
421. 

2  For  full  discussion  of  the  whole  question,  see  Zahn,  Introduction^ 
vol.  ii,  pp.  467-480;  Moffat,  Introduction,  pp.  238-242. 

28 


INTRODUCTION 


of  having  obtained  this  record  from  the  Apostolic  procla- 
mation of  the  Gospel  so  established.  What  Luke  did  in  an 
extended  form  is  evidence  of  what  might  have  been  done 
more  briefly  by  Mark  and  of  what  the  Editor  of  Matthew's 
''sayings"  would  have  had  no  inclination  to  do. 

VIII.  Analysis 

I.  Introductory,  giving  the  Preparation  for  the  Min- 
istry; I  :  1-13. 

(A)  The  Ministry  of  John  the  Baptist;  i  :  1-8. 

(B)  The  Induction  of  Jesus  into  His  work;  i  :  9-13. 
(i)  The  Baptism;  i  :  9-1 1. 

(2)  The  Temptation;  i  :  i2f. 
II.  The  Public  Ministry;  i  :  14-Ch.  13. 

I.      The  Popular  Work  in  Galilee;  1  :  14-7  :  23. 
=  Departure  into  Gahlee,  upon  announcement  of 
the  imprisonment  of  the  Baptist — Theme  of 
His  message;  i  :  i4f. 

(A)  The  call  of  the  four  Disciples;  i  :  16-20. 

(B)  The  opening  day  of  the  Capernaum  Ministry; 

I  :  21-34. 
=  Withdrawal  for  prayer,  preparatory  to  a  circuit 
of  the  suburban  villages  of  Capernaum,  with 
the  healing  of  the  Leper;  i  :  35-45. 

(C)  Return  to  Capernaum  and  work  from  that  cen- 

tre; 2:1-7:  23. 
(i)  The  healing  of  the  Paralytic,  with  accom- 
panying discourse;  2  :  1-12. 

=  Withdrawal    to    the    seaside    followed    by 
crowds;  2  :  13. 

(2)  The  call  of  Levi — Feast  in  his  house — Dis- 

course; 2  : 14-22. 

(3)  The  Sabbath  journey  through  the  grain  field 

— Discourse;  2  :  23-28. 

(4)  The  Sabbath  healing  of  the  Man  with  the 

Withered  Hand,  with  discourse;  3  : 1-5. 
29 


INTRODUCTION 


(5)  The   Council   of   Pharisees   and   Herodians 

against  him;  3:6. 
=  Connecting  narrative — giving. 

(a)  Withdrawal  of  Jesus  to  the  seaside;  3  : 

7a. 

(b)  Following  of  the  multitude — Account  of 

miracles;  3  :  yb-io. 

(c)  Recognition  of  Messiahship  by  unclean 

spirits    and    Jesus'    restriction    upon 
their  proclamation  of  it;  3  :  iif. 

(6)  The  choice  of  the  Twelve;  3  :  13-19. 

=  Crowds  gather  and  friends  [family]  consider 
Him  mad;  3  :  2of. 

(7)  The  Beelzebub  charge  of  the  Pharisees — An- 

swering discourse;  3  :  22-30. 

(8)  The  visit  of  His  Mother  and  Brethren — Ac- 

companying remarks;  3  :  31-35. 
^9)  The  Day  of  Parables  by  the  seaside;  4  :  1-34. 
=  Opening  verses;  4  :  if. 

(a)  The  parable  of  the  Sower,  with  explana- 

tion; 4  : 3-20. 
=  Personal  responsibilities;  4  :  21-25. 

(b)  The  parable  of  the  Good  Seed;  4  :  26-29. 

(c)  The  parable  of  the  Mustard  Seed;  4  : 

30732. 
=  Closing  verses;  4  :  33f. 
=  Withdrawal  to  the  other  side  of  the 

Lake — the  Storm  and  its  stilling;  4  : 

35-41- 

(10)  The  Gerasene  Demoniac;  5  :  1-20. 

=  Return  to  Capernaum — Many  gather  around 
Him;  5  :  21. 

(11)  Jairus'  Daughter  and  the  Woman  by  the 

way;  5  :  22-43. 
=  Departure  to  Nazareth;  6:1. 

(12)  The  rejection  in  Nazareth;  6  :  2-6a. 

(13)  A  Third  Preaching  Tour;  6  :  6b-i3. 

30 


INTRODUCTION 


(14)  Herod's  opinion  of  Jesus,   connected   with 

which  is  an  account  of  the  Baptist's  im- 
prisonment and  death;  6  :  14-29. 
=  Return  of  the  Twelve — Report  of  their  work 
— Withdrawal  to  a  desert  place,  followed 
by    crowds — Jesus'    compassion;    6:30- 

33- 

(15)  The  feeding  of  the  Five  Thousand;  6  :  34-44. 
=  Departure  of  the  Disciples  across  the  Lake — 

Dismissal  of  the  multitude — Withdrawal  of 
Jesus  to  a  mountain  to  pray — Storm  on  the 
Lake — Jesus'  appearance  and  resultant 
calm — Arrival  at  Genessaret — Reception 
by  the  people  and  work  in  this  region;  6  : 
45-56. 

(16)  Ceremonial  criticism  of  the  Pharisees  and  the 

Scribes — Answering  discourse;  7  :  1-23. 
2.     The  Period  of  Retirement  into  the  Regions  of  Tyre 
and  Sidon  and  the  Decapolis;  7  :  24-8  :  26. 
=  Withdrawal  into  the  region  of  Tyre  and  Sidon; 
7  ^24. 
(i)  The  Daughter  of  the  Syro-Phoenician  woman; 
7  : 25-30. 
=  Region  of  the  Decapolis;  7  :  31. 

(2)  The  Deaf  and  Dumb  healed;  7  :  32-37. 

(3)  The  feeding  of  the  Four  Thousand;  8  : 1-9. 
=  Region  of  Dalmanutha;  8  :  10. 

(4)  The  Pharisees'  tempting  request  for  a  Sign — 

Jesus'  reply;  8  :  iif. 
=  Departure  to  other  side  of  Lake;  8  .-13. 

(5)  Jesus'   warning  against   the  leaven  of   the 

Pharisees;  8  :  14-21. 
=  Bethsaida;  8  :  22. 

(6)  The  Blind  Man  healed;  8  :  23-26. 
J.      The  Instructional  Work;  8  :  27-10  :  52. 

(A)  In  the  Decapolis;  8  :  27-9  :  29. 
=  Caesarea  Philippi;  8  :  27. 
31 


INTRODUCTION 


i)  Peter's  Confession — Rebuke  of  Jesus — Dis- 
course by  Jesus  on  Discipleship;  8  :  27-9  : 
I. 

2)  The  Transfiguration  and  Jesus'  announce- 

ment of  the  Passion;  9  :  2-13. 

3)  The  Epileptic  boy;  9  :  14-29. 

B)  On  the  last  Journeys  to  Jerusalem;  9  :  30- 
10  152. 
=  Return  through  Galilee;  9  :  30. 
i)  Renewed  announcement  of  the  Passion;  9  : 

=  Coming  to  Capernaum;  9  :  33. 

2)  The  Dispute  of  the  Disciples — Instruction  by 

Jesus   through   the   object-lesson   of   the 
child;  9  133-50- 
=  In  the  region  of  Perea;  10  :  i. 

3)  The  tempting  question  of  the  Pharisees  re- 

garding divorce;  10  :  2-12. 

4)  The  bringing  of  young  children  to  Him  to  be 

blessed;  10  :  13-16. 

5)  The  question  of  the  Rich  Young  Man;  10  : 

17-22. — Resulting  discourse;  10  :  23-27. — 
Instruction  of  the  Twelve;  10  :  28-31. 
=  Further  stage  of  the  journey;  10  :  32a. 

6)  Renewed  announcement  of  the  Passion;  10  : 

32b-34.^ 

7)  The  ambitious  request  of  the  Sons  of  Zebedee, 

10  : 35-45- 
=  At  Jericho;  10  :  46a. 

8)  The  Blind  Man  healed;  10  :  46b-52. 

The  Messianic  Work  in  Jerusalem;  Chs.  11-13. 
=  Drawing  near  to  Jerusalem;  11  :  if. 
i)  The  Public  Entry  into  the  City;  11  :  2-1  la. 
=  Departure  to  Bethany  and  return  on  the  fol- 
lowing morning;  11  :  iib. 
2)  The  miracle  of  the  Fig  Tree;  11  :  12-14. 
=  Return  to  Jerusalem — Temple;  11  :  15a. 
32 


INTRODUCTION 


(3)  The  cleansing  of  the  Temple;  11  :  I5b-i8. 
=  Departure  to  Bethany;  11  :  19. 

(4)  The  withered  Fig  Tree,  with  explanatory  dis- 

course; II  :  20-25. 
=  Return  again  to  Jerusalem;  11  :  27a. 

(5)  The  demand  for  Christ's  authority  by  the 

Jews — Answering  discourse;  11  :  27-33. 

(6)  The  parable  of  the  Husbandman;    12  :  i- 

12. 

(7)  The  tempting  question  of  the  Pharisees  and 

the  Herodians  regarding  tribute;  12  :  13- 

17- 

(8)  The  tempting  question  of  the  Sadducees  re- 

garding marriage;  12  :  18-27. 

(9)  The  tempting  question  of  a  Scribe  regarding 

the  chief  commandment;  12  :  28-34. 

(10)  The  concrete   question  of  Jesus  regarding 

David's  words  about  Christ;  12  :  35-37. 

(11)  The  warning  against  the  Scribes;   12  138- 

40. 

(12)  The  Widow's  Mite;  12  :  41-44. 

(13)  The  Apocalyptic  Discourse;  Ch.  13. 

III.  The  Passion  and  Resurrection;  14  : 1-16  : 8  [Vs. 
9-20=  later  addition], 
(i)  The  Conspiracy  of  the  Rulers,  the  Supper  at 
Bethany   and    the   Treachery   of   Judas; 
14  :  i-ii. 

(2)  The  Last  Supper;  14  :  12-25. 

(3)  The  Departure  to  the  Mount  of  Olives,  with 

the  Foretelling  of  the  Desertion  and  the 
Denial;  14  :  26-31. 

(4)  The  Agony  in  Gethsemane;  14  :  32-42. 

(5)  The  Arrest;  14  :  43-52- 

(6)  The  Trial  Before  the  Sanhedrin;  14  :  53-72. 

(7)  The  Trial  Before  Pilate;  15  :  1-20. 

(8)  The  Crucifixion;  15  :  21-41. 

(9)  The  Burial;  15  :  42-47. 

33 


INTRODUCTION 


(lo)  The  Visit  of  the  Women  to  the  Tomb;  i6  : 
1-8. 
Later  Added  Ending;  i6  :  9-20. 
Note:  The  symbol  =  is  used  to  designate  the  smaller 
paragraphs  which  serve,  generally  speaking,  to  connect  the 
main  passages  of  the  narrative. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 
Introduction 

Bacon,  Benjamin  W.    An  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament, 

New  Testament  Handbooks,  New  York,  The  Macmillan  Co., 

1900,  Chs.  VIII  and  IX. 
Burton,  Ernest  Dewitt.    A  Short  Introduction  to  the  Gospels, 

Chicago,  The  University  of  Chicago  Press,  1904,  Chs.  I-IV. 
JtJLiCHER,  Adolf.     An  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  Eng. 

Trans.,  New  York,  G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons,  1904,  Book  III,  Ch.  I, 

§§  24-29. 
Zahn,  Theodor.    An  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  Eng. 

Trans.,  3  Vols.,  Edinburgh,  T.  &  T.  Clark,  1909,  Vol.  II,  Ch.  IX. 
Peake,  Arthur  S.     A  Critical  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament, 

Studies  in  Theology,  New  York,  Charles  Scribner's  Sons,  19 10, 

Ch.  XII. 
Moffatt,  James.     An  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  New 

Testament,    International    Theological    Library,    New    York, 

Charles  Scribner's  Sons,  191 1,  Ch.  II. 
Wright,  Arthur.     The  Composition  of  the  Four  Gospels,  London, 

Macmillan  &  Co.,  1890,  Chs.  I-III,  V-XIV,  XVII. 
Robinson,  J.  Armitage.     The  Study  of  the  Gospels,  Handbooks 

for  the  Clergy,  London,  Longmans,  Green  &  Co.,  1902,  Chs.  I-IV. 

Study 

Du  Buisson,  J.  C.    The  Origin  and  Peculiar  Characteristics  of  the 

Gospel  of  St.  Mark,  London,  Froude,  1896. 

Stanton,  Vincent  H.  The  Gospels  as  Historical  Documents, 
2  Vols.,  Cambridge,  University  Press,  1903-1909,  Vol.  II. 

Burton,  Ernest  Dewitt.  Some  Principles  of  Literary  Criticism 
and  Their  Application  to  the  Synoptic  Problem,  Decennial  Pub- 
lications of  Chicago  University,  Chicago,  Chicago  University 
Press,  1904. 

BuRKiTT  F.  Crawford.  The  Gospel  History  and  its  Transmission, 
Edinburgh,  T.  &  T.  Clark,  1906,  Chs.  I-IV. 

Salmon,  George.  The  Human  Element  in  the  Gospels,  New  York, 
E.  P.  Dutton  &  Co.,  1907. 

34 


INTRODUCTION 


H ARNACK,  Adolf.  The  Sayings  of  Jesus,  New  Testament  Studies, 
Eng.  Trans.,  New  York,  G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons,  1908,  Ch.  11. 

Hawkins,  Sir  John  C.  Horae  Synoptical,  2d  Ed.,  Oxford,  Claren- 
don Press,  190Q,  pp.  1-173. 

BuRKiTT,  F.  Crawford.  The  Earliest  Sources  for  the  Life  of  Jesus, 
Modern  Religious  Problems,  Boston,  Houghton,  Mifflin  Co., 
1910. 

Harnack,  Adolf.  The  Date  of  the  Acts  and  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels, 
New  Testament  Studies,  Eng.  Trans.,  New  York,  G.  P.  Put- 
nam's Sons,  1911,  Ch.  Ill,  §§  6-8. 

Sanday,  William  (Editor).  Studies  in  the  Synoptic  Problem,  Ox- 
ford, Clarendon  Press,  191 1. 

Holdsworth,  William  W.  Gospel  Origins,  Studies  in  Theology, 
New  York,  Charles  Scribner's  Sons,  1913,  Chs.  I  and  V. 

Commentary 

Maclear,  G.  F.  The  Gospel  According  to  St.  Mark,  Cambridge 
Bible  for  Schools  and  Colleges,  Cambridge  University  Press, 
1877. 

Gould,  Ezra,  P.  A  Critical  and  Exegetical  Commentary  on  the 
Gospel  according  to  St.  Mark,  International  Critical  Com- 
mentary, New  York,  Charles  Scribner's  Sons,  1896. 

Bruce,  Alexander  B.  The  Synoptic  Gospels,  The  Expositor's 
Greek  Testament,  New  York,  Dodd,  Mead  &  Co.,  1897. 

SwETE,  Henry  B.  The  Gospel  According  to  St.  Mark,  London, 
Macmillan  &  Co.,  1898. 

Maclear,  G.  F.  The  Gospel  According  to  St.  Mark,  Cambridge 
Greek  Testament  for  Schools  and  Colleges,  Cambridge  Univer- 
sity Press,  1899. 

Menzies,  Allan.  The  Earliest  Gospel,  London,  Macmillan  &  Co., 
1901. 

Bosanquet,  B.  H.,  and  Wenham,  R.  A.  Outlines  of  the  Synoptic  Rec- 
ord, New  York,  Longmans,  Green  &  Co.,  1904. 

Du  BuissoN,  J.  C.  The  Gospel  According  to  St.  Mark,  The  Church- 
man's Bible,  London,  Methuen  &  Co.,  1906. 

Bacon,  Benjamin  W.  The  Beginnings  of  Gospel  Story,  New  Haven 
Yale  University  Press,  1909. 

Montefiore,  C.  a.  The  Synoptic  Gospels,  3  Vols.,  London,  Mac- 
millan &  Co.,  1909. 

Chadwick,  G.  a.  The  Gospel  According  to  St.  Mark,  The  Exposi- 
tor's Bible,  New  York,  Hodder  &  Stoughton  (n.  d.). 

Lindsay,  Thomas  M.  The  Gospel  According  to  St.  Mark,  Hand- 
books for  Bible  Classes  and  Private  Students,  Edinburgh,  T.  & 
T.  Clark  (n.  d.). 

Green,  S.  W.  The  Gospel  According  to  St.  Mark,  The  Westmin- 
ster New  Testament,  New  York,  Fleming  H.  Re  veil  Co.  (n.  d.). 

35 


INTRODUCTION 


Salmond,  D.  D.  F.     St.  Mark,  The  New  Century  Bible,  New  York, 
Henry  Froude  (n.  d.)- 

Lives 

Bennett,  W.  H.    The  Life  of  Christ  according  to  St.  Mark,  The 

Expositor's  Library,  London,  Hodder  &  Stoughton  (n.  d.).    ^ 
Edersheim,  Alfred.     The  Life  &  Times  of  Jesus  the  Messiah, 

4th  ed..  New  York,  A.  D.  F.  Randolph  &  Co.  (n.  d.). 
Andrews,  Samuel  J.     The  Life  of  Our  Lord  upon  the  Earth,  2d  ed.. 

New  York,  Charles  Scribner's  Sons,  1891. 
Weiss  Bernhard.     The  Life  of  Christ,  Eng.  Trans.,  Clark  s  Foreign 

Theological  Library,  3  Vols.,  Edinburgh,  T.  &  T.  Clark,  1894- 
Gilbert,  George  Holley.    The  Student's  Life  of  Jesus,  3d  Ed., 

New  York,  The  Macmillan  Co.,  1900.  .    ,  o    • 

Rhees  Rush.    The  Life  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  The  Histoncal  Senes 

for  Bible  Students,  New  York,  Charles  Scribner's  Sons,  1900. 
HoLTZMANN,  OscAR.     The  Life  of  Jesus,  London,  Adam  &  Charies 

Sanday,^Willum.  OuUines  of  the  Life  of  Christ,  New  York,  Charies 
Scribner's  Sons,  1905.  ,     .    ^    » 

Smith,  Davk).  The  Days  of  his  Flesh,  New  York,  A.  C.  Armstrong 
&  Son,  1905. 

Theology 

Garvie,  Alfred  E.  Studies  in  the  Inner  Life  of  Jesus,  New  York, 
A.  C.  Armstrong  &  Son  (n.  d.). 

Bruce,  Alexander  B.  The  Galilean  Gospel,  New  York,  Macmil- 
lan &  Co.,  1882. 

Stevens,  George  B.  The  Theology  of  the  New  Testament,  Inter- 
national Theological  Library,  New  York,   Charies  Scribner's 

Sons,  1899.  .  ,    ^  T.T  xr      1 

Gilbert,  George  Holley.    The  Revelation  of  Jesus,  New  York, 

The  Macmillan  Co.,  1899.  ^        ,  ^     r     j  xt      ^^    1 

Swete,  Henry  B.     Studies  in  the  Teaching  of  Our  Lord,  New  York, 

Edwin  S.  Gorham,  1904.  r  r-  j 

Knox,  George  William.    The  Gospel  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  God, 

Modern  Religious  Problems,  Boston,  Houghton,  Mifflm  Co., 

1909. 
Denney,  James.     Jesus  and  the  Gospel,  New  York,  A.  C.  Armstrong 

&    Son,    1909.  1         rr.        O 

Hogg,  A.  G.  Christ's  Message  of  the  Kingdom,  Edmburgh,  T.  & 
T.  Clark,  1911.  .     .    .r.,.     1 

Moffatt,  James.  The  Theology  of  the  Gospels,  Studies  m  Theology, 
New  York,  Charles  Scribner's  Sons,  1913. 


36 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

I.  Introduction  i:  1-13 
(A)   The  Ministry  of  John  the  Baptist  i:  1-8 

1.  The  beginning  of  the  ^  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,^  the 
Son  of  God. 

2.  Even  as  it  is  written  ^  in  Isaiah  the  prophet, 

Behold,  I  send  my  messenger  before  thy  face. 
Who  shall  prepare  thy  way; 

3.  The  voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness, 

Make  ye  ready  the  way  of  the  Lord, 
Make  his  paths  straight; 

1  Good  tidings.  2  Some  MSS.  omit  the  Son  of  God. 

3  Some  MSS.  read  in  the  prophets. 


1.  The  beginning  of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God: 

The  Evangelist's  introduction  to  his  narrative,  after  the  manner  of 
Prov.  I  :  I  and  Song  1:1;  (cf.  Hos.  i  :  2  [LXXJ).  It  is  connected 
through  the  medium  of  the  citation  in  vs.  2,  3,  with  the  opening  state- 
ment in  ver.  4,  giving  the  sense:  The  beginning  of  the  Gospel  message 
of  Jesus  Christ  came  through  the  Baptist's  heralding  in  the  wilder- 
ness the  baptism  of  repentance,  a  ministry  which  was  in  accord  with 
Old  Testament  prophecy;  so  that  this  coming  of  the  Baptist  in  fulfil- 
ment of  prophecy  indicated  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel  message. 
Gospel  IS  here  used  in  a  more  technical  sense  than  in  i  :  14. ;  13  :  10; 
14  :  9,  under  the  formulating  influence  of  the  Apostolic  preaching 
(cf.  8  :35;  10  :  29). 

2,  3.  The  Evangelist  cites  Mai.  3  :  i  and  Isa.  40  :  3,  referring  both 
passages  to  Isaiah  (cf.  Matt.  21  :  4f.),  either  grouping  them  under  the 
more  important  source,  in  indifference  to  exactness  of  such  excerpts  as 
existed  in  his  day  (Hatch,  Essays,  p.  203^.),  or  copying  them  as  they 
stood  m  some  such  collection.    In  either  case,  he  gives  them  with 

37 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

4.  John   came,    who   baptized   in    the   wilderness   and 
preached  the  baptism  of  repentance  unto  remission  of 

5.  sins.    And  there  went  out  unto  him  all  the  country 

those  changes  in  phrase,  which  were  due  to  the  adaptation  to  New 
Testament  times  of  what  were  considered  the  Messianic  predictions 
of  Scripture.  Such  adaptation  of  these  passages  is  quite  likely  to 
have  been  in  accord  with  the  Baptist's  own  interpretation  of  his  mis- 
sion (cf.  Jn.  3  :  28). 

4.  Who  baptized  in  the  wilderness:  The  words  "who  baptized" 
are  really  a  phrase  descriptive  of  John,  and  should  be  rendered,  "the 
baptizer,"  the  remaining  words,  "in  the  wilderness,"  being  connected 
with  the  following  "and  preached,"  properly  rendered  "preaching." 
The  entire  clause  thus  reads:  "Then  came  John,  the  Baptizer,  preach- 
ing in  the  wilderness  the  baptism  of  repentance."  The  baptism  of 
repentance  unto  remission  of  sins:  This  purports  to  give  the  con- 
tent of  the  Baptist's  message.  It  is  evident,  however,  that  just  in 
proportion  as  the  Baptist  considered  himself  in  the  line  of  the  Old 
Testament  prophets,  he  looked  upon  his  work  as  national  and  not  as 
individual,  and  just  so  far  as  we  have  record  of  his  preaching,  it  was 
general  and  not  individual,  a  class-preaching  rather  than  an  in- 
dividually personal  preaching  (cf.  Lk.  3  :  7,  10,  i2f.).  Consequently, 
though  the  requirements  which  he  imposed  made  the  repentance  one 
of  personal  life  and  not  of  a  mere  ceremony,  yet  this  was  what  the 
Prophets  had  done  in  their  national  conception  of  their  mission.  This 
phrase,  however,  particularly  in  its  unique  portion  ("unto  remission 
of  sins"),  expresses  the  conception  of  individual  repentance  and  in- 
dividual forgiveness  which  was  characteristic  of  the  Apostolic  preach- 
ing (cf.  Acts  2  :  38;  10  :43;  13  :38f.);  so  that,  while  it  doubtless 
represents  what  was  latent  in  the  Baptist's  message,  it  presents  it  in 
the  form  which  belonged  distinctively  to  the  later  Christian  thought. 
We  get  a  better  idea  of  what  the  Baptist's  message  was  from  Mat- 
thew's record  (3  :  2,  "Repent  ye,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at 
hand").  He  began  with  an  emphasis  upon  the  prophetic  idea  of  the 
Messianic  reign  and  rule  ("kingdom")  which  was  to  be  established, 
coming  to  the  announcement  of  the  personal  Messiah  as  he  became 
conscious  of  the  people's  increasing  tendency  to  believe  that  he  him- 
self was  the  Christ  (Lk.  3  :  isf.). 

5.  All  the  country  of  Judea  and  all  they  of  Jerusalem — a  general 
statement  for  the  popular  success  of  his  mission  (Mk.  11  :  32),  the 
details  of  which  are  better  given  in  Luke  (3  :  10-15).  It  is  not  to 
be  forgotten  that  the  religious  leaders  did  not  believe  in  him  (Mk.  11  : 
27-33),  s-s  we  can  easily  understand  from  his  denunciation  of  them 
(Matt.  3  17-10  and  Lk.  II).     This  popular  outpouring  was  due, 

38 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

of  Judaea,  and  all  they  of  Jerusalem;  and  they  were 
baptized  of  him  in  the  river  Jordan,  confessing  their 

6.  sins.  And  John  was  clothed  with  camel's  hair,  and 
had  a  leathern  girdle  about  his  loins,  and  did  eat 

7.  locusts  and  wild  honey.  And  he  preached,  saying, 
There  cometh  after  me  he  that  is  mightier  than  I, 
the  latchet  of  whose  shoes  I  am  not  ^  worthy  to  stoop 

1  Grk.  sufficient. 

not  merely  to  the  desire  for  a  revival  of  prophecy  (cf.  Matt.  11  : 9; 
I  Mac.  4  :  46;  14  :  41),  but  to  the  greater  hope  of  national  deliver- 
ance which  the  people  would  be  quick  to  foresee  in  the  call  to  na- 
tional repentance.  Baptized:  The  Baptist's  rite  symbolized  the 
purification  of  the  people's  lives  and  therefore  must  have  been  largely 
influenced  by  the  Old  Testament  purification  rites;  but  it  symbolized 
this  purification  in  preparation  for  the  entirely  new  condition  to  be 
brought  about  by  the  Messianic  coming,  and  consequently  must 
have  involved  the  idea  contained  in  the  rite  of  proselyte  initiation. 
This  makes  clear  that  the  form  must  have  been,  not  only  that  of 
affusion  (purification),  but  of  immersion  (initiation). 

6.  The  Baptist's  dress  was  that  which  had  been  distinctive  of 
Elijah  (2  Kings  i  :  8)  and  perhaps  had  become  the  traditional 
prophetic  garb  (cf.  Zech.  13  14).  The  garment  is  described  as  of 
camel's  hair,  by  which  we  are  to  understand  not  a  skin,  but  a 
coarse  garment  woven  from  the  rough  hair  of  the  animal.  His  food 
was  simply  such  as  was  conditioned  by  his  wilderness  life — certain 
kinds  of  locusts  being  allowed  as  food  (Lev,  11  :  22),  and  wild-bee 
honey  being  plentiful  in  this  region  (Tristram,  Land  of  Israel,  p.  88). 

7.  Mightier  than  I:  This  represents  the  earlier  idea  of  Jesus  which 
the  Baptist  had — the  relatively  greater  man,  though  doubtless  from 
the  spiritual  point  of  view,  as  is  evident  from  the  following  verse. 
The  later  idea  came  through  the  personal  and  heavenly  revelation  at 
the  Baptism  (Matt.  3  :  14-17,  cf.  Jn.  i  :  30-34).  Naturally,  coming 
as  he  did  in  the  prophetic  line,  the  Baptist's  chief  duty  lay  in  his 
message;  and  yet  the  events  to  which  he  forelooked  stood  so  near 
that  his  message  took  upon  itself  the  form  of  an  immediate  service 
towards  their  realization  (ver.  2f.),  and  the  One  whom  his  message 
announced  was  so  great  and  mighty  in  relation  to  him  who  announced 
him  that  the  spirit  of  his  service  became  one  of  servitude.  The 
Synoptists  unite  in  this  idea,  though  Mark's  form  of  statement — 
the  latchet  of  whose  shoes  I  am  not  worthy  to  stoop  down  and  un- 
loose (in  which  he  is  followed  essentially  by  Luke) — is  perhaps  a  char- 

39 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

8.  down  and  unloose.     I  baptized  you  ^  in  water;  but 
he  shall  baptize  you  ^  in  the  Holy  Spirit. 

(B)  Induction  of  Jesus  into  His  Work,  i :  g-13 

9.  And  it  came  to  pass  in  those  days,  that  Jesus  came 
from  Nazareth  of  Galilee,  and  was  baptized  of  John 

1  with. 

acteristically  vivid  reproduction  of  the  Baptist's  words,  which  we 
have  in  their  more  likely  form  in  Matthew's  simpler  statement 
(3  :  11).  Both  forms,  however,  present  an  act  of  servitude.  This 
spirit  of  service  and  servitude  is  increased  by  his  fuller  knowledge  of 
Jesus.  We  see  the  service  in  his  transference  of  disciples  to  Jesus 
(Jn.  I  :  35-37),  the  servitude  in  his  willing  recedence  before  the 
ministry  of  Jesus  (Jn.  3  :  2gi.).  It  is  significant  that  his  final  query 
regarding  Jesus  came  from  his  failure  to  understand  that  self-sacrifice 
was  as  fully  involved  in  the  Messiah's  work  as  in  his  own. 

8.  Water  .  .  .  Holy  Spirit:  The  correlation  of  these  terms  was 
suggested  to  the  Baptist  from  such  prophetic  statements  as  Isa.  44  :  3 
and  Ezek.  36  :  25f.,  which  he  naturally  modified  in  phraseology,  in 
view  of  the  rite  which  he  performed. 

I.  The  Baptism  of  Jesus 

9.  Nazareth  of  Galilee:  Mark  is  specific  in  the  naming  of  the  place, 
as  compared  with  Matthew  (3  :  13)  who  uses  the  general  term,  "from 
Galilee."  This  is  due,  doubtless,  to  his  readers  being  Gentiles,  in 
contrast  with  the  extra-Palestinian  Jewish  readers  of  Matthew. 
Luke,  who  also  wrote  for  a  Gentile  ignorance  of  Palestine,  secures  his 
object  by  not  burdening  his  narrative  with  any  reference  to  the 
place  at  all.  It  was  an  insignificant  spot,  unnamed  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, apparently  unknown  to  Josephus,  and  evidently  in  the  time  of 
Jesus  held  in  slight  esteem  ( Jn.  i  :  46) .  Its  modem  name  is  En-Ndsira. 
It  has  a  present  population  of  about  5000,  and  though  secluded  among 
the  foothills  of  the  Lebanon  range,  is  picturesquely  located  at  a 
height  of  some  1600  ft.,  with  a  beautiful  view  of  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon 
as  far  as  Carmel.  Was  baptized  of  John  in  (properly  into)  the  Jor- 
dan: Mark  contents  himself  with  a  bare  statement  of  the  fact,  letting 
the  following  incident  of  the  opened  heavens  stand  as  guaranty  that 
Jesus  was  not  baptized  as  one  of  the  people  for  the  remission  of  his 
sins.  Matthew  alone  gives  the  purpose  Jesus  had  in  mind  in  sub- 
mitting to  this  rite,  which  was  that  thus  both  he  and  the  Baptist 
should  "fulfil  all  righteousness"  (3  :  15).    This  does  not  mean  that  by 

40 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

10.  ^  in   the  Jordan.     And  straightway  coming  up  out 
of  the  water,  he  saw  the  heavens  rent  asunder,  and  the 

11.  Spirit  as  a  dove  descending  upon  him:  and  a  voice 

*  with. 

going  through  this  form  with  those  whom  the  Baptist  had  summoned 
to  prepare  themselves  for  the  coming  Messianic  Kingdom,  he  would 
be  identifying  himself  with  the  cause  of  Righteousness  which  this 
kingdom  was  to  establish  in  the  world,  and  so  contributing  to  its 
fulfilment.  This  would  be  a  technical  use  of  "Righteousness"  which 
would  be  quite  beyond  the  Baptist's  understanding  at  that  time,  as  it 
was  apparently  even  later  (Matt,  ii  :  2S.),  and  would  be  a  poor  con- 
ception of  "fulfilling"  it.  It  means  rather  that  in  so  far  as  this  rite 
was  symbolical  of  the  candidate's  moral  attitude  towards  the  coming 
Messianic  work  Jesus  submitted  to  it  as  an  expression  of  the  moral 
attitude  which  he  himself  was  thus  willing  publicly  to  assume  towards 
it.  The  people's  attitude  came  through  their  repentance  and  was  one 
of  receptivity  towards  this  work  in  its  action  upon  themselves, 
Jesus'  attitude  came  through  the  development  of  his  consciousness  of 
himself  with  relation  to  the  work  he  was  to  do  and  was  one  of  con- 
secration to  its  accomplishment.  This  meaning  alone  retains  "Right- 
eousness" in  that  Old  Testament  sense  which  the  Baptist  could 
understand, — viz.  of  living  up  to  the  prescribed  forms  which  symbolize 
relationship  between  God  and  man.  It  was  in  this  sense  that  the 
Baptist  had  instituted  this  rite,  and  it  was  in  this  sense  that  by  sub- 
mitting to  this  rite  Jesus  fulfilled  Righteousness.  He  lived  up  to  the 
form  that  the  Baptist  had  prescribed  to  express  the  candidate's 
moral  attitude  towards  the  coming  Messianic  work.  The  Baptist 
realized,  doubtless  through  his  examination  of  him  as  he  presented 
himself  to  be  baptized  (Smith,  In  the  Days  of  His  Flesh,  p.  31),  that  it 
could  not  express  this  candidate's  repentant  preparation  for  this 
work,  and  thus  demurred  to  administer  it;  but  Jesus  realized  that  it 
would  express  his  consecration  to  the  work  and  consequently  urged 
its  administration  as  a  fulfilling  of  Righteousness  on  his  part  as  really 
as  on  the  part  of  the  people. 

10.  The  Spirit  as  a  dove  descending  upon  [better  into]  him :  When 
we  remember  the  idea  of  'moving'  ('brooding,'  marg.)  connected 
with  the  Spirit  in  the  Creation  narrative  (Gen.  i  :  2)  and  the  idea 
of  the  Messianic  endowment  with  the  Spirit  (cf.  Isa.  11  :  2;  42  :  i; 
48  :  16;  61  :  i),  it  is  clear  that  this  descent  of  the  Spirit  in  the  form 
of  a  dove  was  symbolical  of  this  promised  endowment  of  the  Messiah 
for  his  specific  work. 

11.  Thou  art  my  beloved  Son,  in  thee  I  am  well  pleased:  Such 
Old  Testament  phrases  as  Ps.  2  :  7;  Isa.  42  :  i;  62  : 4,  show  this 

41 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

came  out  of  the  heavens,  Thou  art  my  beloved  Son, 
in  thee  I  am  well  pleased. 

12.  And  straightway  the  Spirit  driveth  him  forth  into 

13.  the  wilderness.  And  he  was  in  the  wilderness  forty 
days  tempted  of  Satan;  and  he  was  with  the  wild 
beasts;  and  the  angels  ministered  unto  him. 

divine  declaration  to  have  signified  the  acceptance  of  Jesus  as  Mes- 
sianically  endowed. 

2.  The  Temptation 

12,  13.  The  Spirit  driveth  him  forth  .  .  .  and  he  was  tempted : 
This  is  the  Messianic  Spirit  with  which  Jesus  had  been  endowed  in 
his  Baptism,  the  purpose  being,  in  thus  leading  him  into  the  solitude 
of  the  wilderness,  to  test  the  consecration  of  himself  to  his  work 
which  he  had  pubUcly  announced  in  this  rite.  Jesus'  growing  con- 
viction that  he  bore  a  relation  to  God  which  no  one  else  around  him 
bore  led  him  to  the  conviction  that  there  must  be  a  unique  mission 
for  him  to  accomplish  for  God,  since  for  what  other  purpose  could 
this  unique  personal  relation  exist?  Under  this  conviction  did  he 
come  to  be  baptized,  as  a  public  consecration  of  himself  to  the  Mes- 
sianic work  which  the  Baptist  was  heralding  as  near  at  hand.  After 
the  revelation  which  accompanied  his  Baptism  and  assured  him  of 
his  endowment  with  the  Messianic  Spirit,  involving,  as  it  did,  the 
supernatural  powers  of  the  Messianic  age,  he  would  naturally  seek 
seclusion  for  his  own  thoughts,  which  would  inevitably  bring  him 
into  a  struggle  with  the  perplexities  as  to  how  these  powers  were  to 
be  used.  Mark  (with  Luke)  indicates  the  temptation  as  an  incident 
in  this  seclusion,  Matthew  indicates  it  as  the  purpose  (4:1).  Wil- 
derness: Probably,  a  remote  and  lonelier  part  of  the  wilderness 
of  Judaea  in  which  John  was  baptizing.  Tempted:  The  presentation 
of  the  conscious  choice  between  good  and  evil  made  to  appear  attrac- 
tive is  perfectly  possible  to  a  sinless  soul.  Satan:  The  Hebrew  name 
for  'Adversary.'  All  three  Synoptists  unite  in  describing  the  testing 
as  objective  to  Jesus  and  not  originating  in  his  own  soul.  Wild 
beasts:  Added  possibly  as  a  vivid  detail  of  the  desolateness  of  the 
seclusion;  though  the  presence  of  wild  beasts  in  the  desert  regions  of 
Palestine  is  testified  to  (Tristram,  Land  of  Israel,  p.  240).  Angels: 
This  reference  to  angelic  ministry  is  based  doubtless  on  the  assurance 
of  Ps.  91  :  II. 


42 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

II.  The  Public  Ministry  i  :  14-7  :  23 
I.  The  Popular  Work  in  Galilee,  i :  14-7  :  2j 

14.  Now  after  John  was  delivered  up,  Jesus  came  into 

15.  Galilee,  preaching  the  ^gospel  of  God,  and  saying. 
The  time  is  fulfilled,  and  the  kingdom  of  God  is  at 
hand:  repent  ye,  and  believe  in  the  ^  gospel. 

{A)  The  Call  of  the  Four  Disciples,  i :  16-20 

16.  And  passing  along  by  the  sea  of  Galilee,  he  saw 
Simon  and  Andrew  the  brother  of  Simon  casting  a 

1  good  tidings. 

14,  15.  After  John  was  delivered  up:  In  common  with  the  other 
Synoptists,  Mark  gives  no  record  of  Jesus'  gaining  of  his  first  disciples 
at  the  Jordan,  his  presence  at  his  first  public  Passover,  and  his  sub- 
sequent Judasan  ministry  (cf.  Jn.  chs.  1-3).  Further,  his  record  of 
the  Baptist's  imprisonment  is  given  later  (6  :  17-20),  in  connection 
with  the  record  of  his  death  (6  :  21-29).  The  Fourth  Gospel,  however, 
suggests  the  determining  influence  of  this  imprisonment  upon  the 
cessation  of  Jesus'  Judasan  work  and  his  departure  into  Galilee.  It 
implies  that  Jesus  left  Judaea  to  avoid  a  collision  with  the  Jerusalem 
Pharisees,  who  had  been  informed  that  Jesus'  work  was  promising 
to  be  even  more  successful  than'  the  Baptist's,  the  significance  of 
which  is  apparent  in  view  of  the  Baptist's  imprisonment,  since  the 
forced  ending  of  the  Baptist's  work  would  embolden  the  Pharisees 
against  Jesus  (4  :  1-3).  The  time  is  fulfilled:  Jesus'  preaching  is 
here  given  in  its  taking  up  of  the  message  of  the  Baptist,  by  which 
alone  Jesus  could  identify  himself  as  the  one  whom  the  Baptist 
had  heralded,  and  in  its  advance  upon  that  message,  by  which  only 
he  could  confirm  the  Baptist's  testimony  of  the  superiority  to  him- 
self of  this  Coming  One.  The  identity  of  his  message  with  the  Bap- 
tist's is  seen  in  his  announcement  of  the  nearness  of  the  kingdom  and 
his  call  for  repentance;  his  advance  upon  it,  in  his  call  for  faith.  This 
summons  to  repentance,  however,  had  a  different  accent  from  that  of 
the  Baptist's;  since  it  called  for  it  as  a  final  act  in  the  presence  of  the 
kingdom,  while  the  Baptist's  called  for  it  simply  in  preparation  for 
the  kingdom's  coming.  Further,  his  summons  to  faith,  though  it 
was  to  faith  in  the  message  of  the  good  news  ('Gospel,'  in  its  primary 
sense),  involved  a  personal  relationship  of  confidence  in  himself  as 
the  one  delivering  the  message. 

16.  Simon  and  Andrew:  Simon  (the  Hellenized  form  of  Simeon 

43 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


17.  net  in  the  sea;  for  they  were  fishers.  And  Jesus  said 
unto  them,  Come  ye  after  me,  and  I  will  make  you 

18.  to  become  fishers  of  men.     And  straightway  they 

19.  left  the  nets,  and  followed  him.  And  going  on  a  little 
further,  he  saw  ^  James  the  son  of  Zebedee,  and  John 
his  brother,  who  also  were  in  the  boat  mending  the 
nets. 

1  Jacob. 

Gen.  29  :  33),  a  name  doubtless  made  popular  by  Simon  Macca- 
beus, is  the  only  name  used  of  Peter  in  the  Synoptics  up  to  the  time 
of  the  choosing  of  the  Twelve.  The  Fourth  Gospel  records  the  change 
to  Peter  (ATa.m  =  Kepha,  Cephas)  as  taking  place  at  his  first  coming  to 
Jesus  (i  :  42).  After  the  choosing  of  the  Twelve,  Peter  is  the  common 
name,  though  Simon  is  also  used  in  combination  with  Peter  (Matt. 
16  :  16;  Mk.  14  -.37),  as  well  as  with  Bar- Jonah  (Matt.  16  :  17), 
and  alone  (Matt.  17  :  25;  Lk.  22  :  31;  24  :  34).  Matthew  in  our 
passage  hints  at  the  later  use  (4  :  i8)-  These  brothers  came  from 
Bethsaida  (Jn.  i  :  44),  but  now  resided  in  Capernaum  (Mk.  i  :  21). 
Their  father's  name  was  Jonas  (Matt.  16  :  17),  or  John  (Jn.  i  :42). 
Tradition  gives  the  mother's  name  as  Joanna.  Probably  both  had 
been  disciples  of  the  Baptist  (Jn.  i  :  35,  4of.).  For  some  time,  ap- 
parently, they  had  been  following  Jesus,  both  in  Galilee  (Jn.  2  :  2, 
I  if.)  and  in  Judaea  (Jn.  3  :  22;  4  :  2).  They  had  returned  with  him 
to  Galilee  (Jn.  4  :  3,  8  ;  27-33),  but  for  some  reason  had  apparently 
gone  back  to  their  occupation. 

17.  Fishers  of  men — a  metaphor  suggested,  not  only  by  their 
occupation,  but  especially  by  the  miraculous  draught  of  fishes,  which 
Luke  alone  records  (5  :  4-10).  Its  significance  would  be  suggested 
to  them  further  by  such  Old  Testament  passages  as  Jer.  16  :  16  and 
Amos  4:2. 

19,  20.  James  .  .  .  and  John:  James  (Hellenized  form  of  Jacob, 
Gen.  25  :  26)  and  John  (Hellenized  form  of  Johanan,  i  Chron.  3  :  24, 
Jonah,  2  Kings  14  :  25)  were  also  ev^idently  resident  in  Capernaum. 
Their  mother  is  supposed  to  have  been  Salome  (from  the  comparison 
of  Mk.  15  :4o  with  Matt.  27  :  56).  With  Peter  they  formed  the 
circle  of  the  most  intimate  disciples  of  Jesus.  They  were  named  by 
Jesus  "Boanerges"  (Mk.  3  :  17)  meaning  Sons  of  Tumult,  or  as  ex- 
plained by  Mark,  "Sons  of  Thunder"  (see  notes  on  3  :  16-19). 
James  was  the  first  martyr  of  the  Apostle  band  (Acts  12  :  2).  John 
outlived  the  others,  completing  his  work  in  the  Ephesian  region  of 
Asia  Minor.    The  fact  that  their  father  had  hired  servants  suggests 

44 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

20.  And  straightway  he  called  them:  and  they  left  their 
father  Zebedee  in  the  boat  with  the  hired  servants, 
and  went  after  him. 

(B)  The  Opening  Day  in  the  Capernaum  Ministry ^ 
1 :  21-34  (45) 

21.  And  they  go  into  Capernaum;  and  straightway  on 
the  sabbath  day  he  entered  into  the  synagogue  and 
taught. 

that  the  family  possessed  some  means.  Straightway  he  called  them: 
This  statement  as  to  the  immediacy  of  the  second  call  leaves  room 
for,  if  it  does  not  suggest,  the  draught  of  fishes  as  prefatory  to  the 
first  call.  This  call  of  the  four  fishermen  at  the  Lake  presupposes 
the  acquaintance  with  them  at  Jordan  (Jn.  i  :  35-51).  It  was  a 
call  to  a  more  formal  association  of  themselves  with  Jesus,  which 
would  be  significant,  in  view  of  such  opposition  of  the  religious 
leaders  as  had  compelled  Jesus  to  abandon  his  Judaean  work.  Their 
immediate  response  consequently  shows  a  stronger  personal  attach- 
ment to  Jesus  than  we  might  otherwise  suppose  existed.  The  call, 
as  Jesus  placed  it  before  them,  was  to  follow  out  in  their  mission 
the  principle  which  he  had  already  followed  out  in  his — the  principle 
of  personal  contact  with  and  personal  impress  upon  men. 

21.  Capernaum — (properly  Kapharnaum  =  Village  of  Nahum),  the 
place  which  Jesus  made  the  headquarters  for  his  Galilean  minis- 
try. It  was  on  the  Western  side  of  the  North  shore  of  the  Lake  of 
Gennesaret,  though  there  is  considerable  dispute  as  to  its  exact  site. 
The  discussion  lies  mainly  between  Tell  HUm  and  Khan  Minyeh,  with 
the  argument  in  favor  of  the  former,  because  of  growing  evidence 
that  the  name  was  not  confined  to  the  city,  but  was  extended  to 
the  district  surrounding  it,  which  would  bring  the  place  into 
that  connection  with  the  Plain  of  Gennesaret  which  is  implied 
in  the  New  Testament  notices  (cf.  Jno,  6:17  with  Mk.  6:53) 
and  in  the  description  of  Josephus  (Jewish  Wars  III,  10:8). 
In  the  Gospel  times  it  was  a  place  of  considerable  importance.  It 
was  a  customs  post  (Mk.  2  :  14),  the  residence  of  a  representative  of 
the  king,  Herod  Antipas  (Jn.  4  :  46  margin),  and  a  military  station, 
whose  commander  had  built  a  synagogue  for  the  people  (Lk.  7  :  i-io). 
Mark's  mention  of  the  place  here  lacks  the  narrative  connection  in 
Matthew  (4  :  13),  which  shows  that  Jesus  made  it  his  place  of  abode 
upon  leaving  Nazareth,  and  particularly  in  Luke  (4  :  31},  which  makes 

45 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

22.  And  they  were  astonished  at  his  teaching:  for  he 
taught  them  as  having  authority,  and  not  as  the 

23.  scribes.   And  straightway  there  was  in  their  synagogue 

24.  a  man  with  an  unclean  spirit;  and  he  cried  out,  saying, 

his  going  to  Capernaum  the  sequence  of  his  rejection  at  Nazareth 
(but  cf.  note  on  6  : 1-6).  Taught:  The  Synagogue  being,  not  so  much 
a  place  of  pubhc  worship  as  of  instruction  in  the  Law,  teaching  was 
practically  the  chief  feature  of  its  Sabbath  service.  It  was  connected 
with  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures  and  was  not  necessarily  conducted 
by  the  oflQcials,  but  was  open — as  was  the  reading  itself  (Lk.  4  :  16) — 
to  any  competent  Israelite  whom  they  might  invite  (Acts  13  :  15; 
cf.  Schiirer,  Jewish  People  in  the  Time  of  Christ,  II  :  ii,  75-83).  It 
afforded  a  favorable  opportunity  to  Jesus  for  the  delivery  of  his 
message,  which  he  frequently  embraced  during  his  Galilean  ministry 
(cf.  Mk.  I  :  39;  Jn.  18  :  20). 

22.  Astonished:  The  instruction  usually  given  consisted  largely 
in  the  recitation  of  comments  on  the  text  by  famous  Rabbis.  The 
character  of  Jesus'  instruction  may  be  gathered  from  the  narrative 
of  his  address  in  the  Synagogue  at  Nazareth  given  by  Luke  (4  :  16- 
31).  It  was  a  message  of  his  own,  directed  to  the  spiritual  condition 
of  his  hearers  and  uttered  with  a  conviction  due  to  his  consciousness 
of  himself  and  his  mission.  It  is  not  surprising  that  the  impression 
produced  upon  the  people  was  of  one  who  spoke  with  a  personal  au- 
thority of  which  they  were  never  conscious  in  the  usual  comments, 
which  were  based  upon  the  appeal  to  the  opinion  of  others. 

23.  Immediately — one  of  the  characteristic  words  of  the  Second 
Gospel  and  often  used,  as  here  and  in  ver.  21,  not  so  much  to  denote 
the  exact  immediateness  of  the  sequence,  as  in  a  vivid  way  to  unify 
within  the  incident  the  several  items  which  constituted  it.  Unclean 
Spirit:  The  spirits  are  almost  always  designated  as  "unclean,"  refer- 
ence being  had  to  the  ceremonially  unclean  associations  of  the  pos- 
sessed {e.g.  deserted  places.  Matt.  12  :43;  tombs,  Mk.  5:2),  or 
to  the  ceremonially  unclean  nature  of  the  demons  possessing  them 
{e.g.  Lk.  4  :  33;  cf.  Mk.  3  :  22) — a  survival  of  the  primitive  idea  that 
all  demons  were  unholy  and  therefore  unclean.  It  was  mingled 
largely  with  awe,  and  resulted  in  a  freedom  being  accorded  to  the 
possessed  which  did  not  attach  to  ceremonial  uncleanness  in  general. 
Luke  ajone,  and  in  but  two  passages  (7  :  21;  8  :  2)  designates  them 
as  "evil,"  possibly,  but  not  necessarily,  with  reference  to  immoral 
tendencies  in  the  possession  (cf.  Acts  19  :  13-16);  though  the  designa- 
tion of  them  in  Matt.  12  :  45  and  Luke  11  :  26  as  "wicked"  evidently 
calls  attention  to  these  traits. 

24.  The  Holy  One  of  God:  It  is  evident  that  this  term  is  ascribed 

46 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

What  have  we  to  do  with  thee,  Jesus  thou  Nazarene? 
art  thou  come  to  destroy  us?    I  know  thee  who  thou 

25.  art,  the  Holy  One  of  God.    And  Jesus  rebuked  ^  him, 

26.  saying.  Hold  thy  peace,  and  come  out  of  him.  And 
the  unclean  spirit,  ^  tearing  him  and  crying  with  a 

27.  loud  voice,  came  out  of  him.  And  they  were  all 
amazed,  insomuch  that  they  questioned  among  them- 
selves, saying.  What  is  this?  a  new  teaching!  with 
authority  he  commandeth  even  the  unclean  spirits, 

'  it.  2  convulsing. 

to  Jesus  through  a  sense  of  hostility  and  fear  on  the  part  of  the  demon 
itself  (cf.  Jas.  2  :  19;  Matt.  8  :  29),  and  not  merely  as  an  expression 
by  the  man  of  a  consciousness  of  ceremonial,  much  less  of  moral, 
difiference  between  himself  and  this  Teacher. 

25.  Hold  thy  peace — strictly,  'Be  muzzled'  (cf.  its  literal  use  in 
I  Tim.  5  :  18;  I  Cor.  9  : 9,  and  its  metaphorical  use  in  Mk.  4  :  39). 
With  his  consciousness  of  his  own  Messiahship  and  his  desire  that 
his  disciples  should  come  to  know  him  as  such  (Mk.  8  :  27-29),  Jesus 
had  no  wish  that  they,  or  the  people  generally,  should  be  brought  to 
this  conviction  through  such  channels  as  these.  The  only  true  con- 
ception of  his  Messiahship  was  that  which  came  from  his  personal 
impress  of  himself  upon  their  own  religious  experience.  Come  out  of 
him:  Whatever  superstitions  may  have  been  resident  in  the  popular 
idea  of  these  afflictions,  and  whatever  elements  of  natural  disease 
may  have  been  involved  in  them,  this  command  confronts  us  with 
the  fact  that  Jesus  recognized  them  and  dealt  with  them  as  cases  of 
actual  possession  (cf.  Mk.  5  :  8;  9  :  25). 

26.  This  idea  of  possession  is  emphasized  by  the  statement  of 
personal  action  on  the  part  of  the  spirit  in  obedience  to  the  command: 
Tearing  him  and  crying  out. 

27.  They  were  all  amazed — a  similar  impression  to  that  which 
came  from  his  teaching.  It  was,  however,  of  a  deeper  and  more  pro- 
found kind,  as  would  be  natural,  in  view  of  the  act  performed.  It  was 
awe  rather  than  astonishment  (cf.  9  :  15;  10  :  32;  16  :  5f.).  And  yet 
in  the  minds  of  the  people  the  impression  was  vitally  associated  with 
the  personality  which  had  so  authoritatively  manifested  itself  in  the 
teaching.  This  is  clear  from  the  disconnected  remarks  of  the  excited 
throng  which  Mark  so  vividly  reproduces.  What  is  this?  a  new 
(vigorous,  forceful  as  in  2  :  2if.,  not  simply  novd,  strange)  teaching! 
with  authority  he  commandeth  even  the  imclean  spirits  and  they 

47 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

28.  and  they  obey  him.  And  the  report  of  him  went  out 
straightway  everywhere  into  all  the  region  of  Galilee 
round  about. 

29.  And  straightway,  when  ^  they  were  come  out  of 
the  synagogue,  they  came  into  the  house  of  Simon 

30.  and  Andrew,  with  ^  James  and  John.  Now  Simon's 
wife's  mother  lay  sick  of  a  fever;  and  straightway 

31.  they  tell  him  of  her:  and  he  came  and  took  her  by  the 
hand,  and  raised  her  up;  and  the  fever  left  her,  and 
she  ministered  into  them. 

32.  And  at  even,  when  the  sun  did  set,  they  brought 

1  Some  MSS.  read  he  ...  he.  2  Jacob. 

obey  him — a  procedure  imperial  in  its  difference  from  the  magical 
exorcisms  at  which  the  Rabbis  labored. 

28.  All  the  region  of  Galilee  round  about — the  outlying  country 
about  Capernaum,  probably  a  much  wider  extent  of  territory  than 
that  later  covered  in  Jesus'  first  preaching  tour  (see  note  on  i  :  38f.). 

29.  The  house  of  Simon  and  Andrew:  As  Simon  was  married,  the 
house  doubtless  belonged  to  him,  while  Andrew  shared  it  with  him. 
Whether  this  became  the  Capernaum  home  of  Jesus  is  not  certain. 
This  visit  after  the  Synagogue  service  was  evidently  the  first  he  had 
made  to  the  house,  and  he  must  have  been  in  the  city  at  least  one 
night  previous  to  the  Sabbath.  At  the  same  time,  Peter's  pursuit 
of  Jesus  in  his  early  morning  departure  from  the  city  (ver.  35f.)  would 
seem  to  indicate  that  they  resided  together  (cf .  Matt.  1 7  :  24f .  against 
which  Matt.  13  :  36;  Mk.  9  :  33;  10  :  10  are  not  relevant). 

30.  31.  A  fever — possibly  of  the  malarial  type  frequent  in  the 
marshy  plain  in  which  Capernaum  was  situated,  though  Luke's 
description  of  it  as  "a  great  fever"  (Galen  distinguishes  fevers  as 
"great"  and  "slight")  might  indicate  that  it  was  of  a  more  malignant 
sort.  Even  so,  it  is  Luke  who  emphasizes  the  immediateness  of  the 
recovery  (4  :  38f .) .  Ministered  imto  them — doubtless  at  the  Sabbath 
meal.  This  statement,  which  is  made  by  all  the  Evangelists,  implies 
the  immediateness  of  the  recovery  in  the  fact  of  its  completeness. 
The  lassitude  usually  present  in  fever  convalescence  is  absent,  and  the 
customary  duties  of  the  house  are  at  once  resumed. 

32,  33.  When  the  sun  did  set:  The  ending  of  the  Sabbath  with  the 
setting  of  the  sun  permitted  the  labor  involved  in  the  carrying  and, 
in  fact,  in  the  curing  of  the  sick  (Lk.  13  :  10-14).   All  the  city  was 

48 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

unto  him  all  that  were  sick,  and  them  that  were  ^  pos- 
7,7^.  sessed  with  demons.    And  all  the  city  was  gathered 

34.  together  at  the  door.  And  he  healed  many  that  were 
sick  with  divers  diseases,  and  cast  out  many  demons; 
and  he  suffered  not  the  demons  to  speak,  because 
they  knew  him.^ 

35.  And  in  the  morning,  a  great  while  before  day,  he 
rose  up  and  went  out,  and  departed  into  a  desert 

36.  place,  and  there  prayed.    And  Simon  and  they  that 

1  demoniacs.  2  Many  MSS.  add  to  be  Christ,  cf.  Lk.  4:  4i- 

gathered  at  the  door:  The  news  not  only  of  the  public  healing  in  the 
synagogue  but  also  of  the  private  cure  in  the  house  had  spread 
throughout  the  city,  with  the  result  that  all  who  were  diseased  or 
possessed  of  evil  spirits  were  brought  about  the  narrow  door  which 
in  Oriental  houses  opened  through  the  wall  that  shut  off  the  house 
itself  from  the  street  (cf.  11  :  4). 

34.  Many:  Mark  is  general  in  his  statement,  Matthew  compre- 
hensive ("all,"  8:17),  Luke  particular  ("Every  one  of  them/' 
4  :  40),  the  impression  from  the  combined  narrative  being  that  to  this 
widely  gathered  appeal  of  sufifering  Jesus  responded  with  an  un- 
restrained largess  of  his  healing  gifts. 

The  First  Preaching  Tour,  i :  35-45 

35.  A  great  while  before  day  (lit.  very  much  at  night) — Mark  here, 
as  in  ver.  32,  is  most  precise  in  his  statement  of  time,  a  trait  per- 
fectly natural,  in  view  of  the  personal  reminiscence  that  lies  behind  his 
narrative,  and  is  particularly  disclosed  through  the  specific  reference  to 
Simon  in  the  following  verse.  A  desert  place — one  of  the  many 
barren  and  solitary  places  in  the  ravines  and  on  the  tops  of  the  ranges 
just  back  of  Capernaum.  Prayed  (Better,  was  praying,  or  even 
continued  in  prayer) — The  events  of  the  previous  day  had  confronted 
him  with  the  immediate  purpose  of  his  ministry,  which  was  the 
heralding  to  men  of  the  good  news  of  the  kingdom.  This  could  not  be 
accomplished  by  staying  in  Capernaum  and  trusting  men  to  come  to 
hear  his  message;  it  necessitated  his  leaving  the  city  and  taking  his 
message  to  men.  And  for  this  undertaking — the  first  mission  tour  of 
his  ministry — he  needed  special  communion  with  the  Father  who  had 
appointed  him  his  ministrs^  and  given  him  its  message. 

36.  37.  Simon  and  they  that  were  with  him — not  Simon's  house- 

49 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

37.  were  with  him  followed  after  him;  and  they  found  him, 

38.  and  say  unto  him,  All  are  seeking  thee.  And  he  saith 
unto  them.  Let  us  go  elsewhere  into  the  next  towns, 
that  I  may  preach  there  also;  for  to  this  end  came  I 

39.  forth.  And  he  went  into  their  synagogues  through- 
out all  Galilee,  preaching  and  casting  out  demons. 

hold,  nor  necessarily  his  intimate  friends,  but  simply  those  of  the  city 
who  had  come  early  to  Simon's  house,  where  the  heaUng  ministry  of 
the  evening  before  had  taken  place,  to  see  and  hear  again  this  wonder- 
ful teacher  and  have  a  fresh  experience  of  his  wonderful  powers. 
Jesus'  following  had  not  yet  had  time  to  crystallize  itself  into  a 
definite  discipleship,  which  could  be  refeired  to  by  this  name.  It  is 
clear  that  the  Evangelist  got  this  incident  from  Peter's  own  lips.  It 
bears  all  the  marks  of  the  early  surroundings  of  Jesus'  work.  Followed 
after  him — literally,  pursued  him,  tracked  him.  All  are  seeking  thee : 
Their  idea  of  Jesus'  ministry  was  narrower  than  his  own.  They 
conceived  of  it  as  measured  by  men's  seeking  of  Jesus;  he,  as  measured 
by  his  seeking  of  men. 

38.  The  next  towns — (strictly  village-cities) — a  peculiar  word, 
nowhere  else  used  in  the  New  Testament.  Its  reference  is  to  the 
larger  villages,  which  in  location  were  nearer  the  city  centers,  and  so 
stood  in  importance  between  the  isolated  hamlets  and  the  cities  them- 
selves. Practically  equivalent  to  our  term  suburban  towns.  (See  the 
catalogue  of  Josh.  15  :  20-61  for  the  expression  "cities  with  their 
villages";  cf.  also  Josh.  10  :  36-39  lxx).  According  to  Mark,  there- 
fore, Jesus'  first  preaching  tour  was  a  restricted  one,  as  far  as  extent  of 
territory  is  considered,  which  agrees  with  this  Evangelist's  idea  of  the 
development  of  his  whole  ministry.  To  this  end  came  I  forth — [from 
Capernaum] — against  Luke's  transcendental  phrase  "for  therefore 
was  I  sent."  His  immediate  purpose  had  been  prayer;  his  ultimate 
purpose  had  been  this  extension  of  his  ministry.  Simon  and  his 
companions  must  not  think  to  take  him  back  to  Capernaum,  as  though 
he  had  come  out  simply  for  an  hour's  devotion;  they  must  see  the 
larger  plan  he  had  which,  however  it  might  centre  at  Capernaum, 
moved  out  over  the  surrounding  region. 

39.  Throughout  all  Galilee:  These  words,  being  clearly  inconsist- 
ent with  Mark's  idea  of  a  restricted  tour,  should  be  omitted,  as  an 
editorial  addition,  on  the  basis  of  Matthew's  comprehensive  statement 
(4  :  23).  Without  them  the  verse  reads  most  naturally  and  is  in 
perfect  agreement  with  the  rest  of  the  passage.  (For  the  existence  of 
Synagogues  in  such  small  communities  as  would  be  represented  by 
these  suburban  towns,  see  Schiirer,  II,  ii,  73). 

50 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

40.  And  there  cometh  to  him  a  leper,  beseeching  him/ 
and  kneeling  down  to  him,  and  saying  unto  him,  If 

41.  thou  wilt,  thou  canst  make  me  clean.  And  being 
moved  with  compassion,  he  stretched  forth  his  hand, 
and  touched  him,  and  saith  unto  him,  I  will;  be  thou 

42.  made  clean.     And  straightway  the  leprosy  departed 

43.  from  him,  and  he  was  made  clean.    And  he  ^  strictly 

1  Some  MSS.  omit  and  kneeling  down  to  him.  -  sternly. 

40.  A  leper:  The  leprosy  of  the  Bible  was  not  treated  as  a  conta- 
gious disease,  and  consequently  was  different  from  that  which  goes 
under  this  name  in  medicine  (elephantiasis  Gracoriitn).  It  affected  the 
skin  rather  than  the  bones,  did  not  necessarily  cripple  the  sufferer,  and 
was  never  spoken  of  as  a  fatal  malady.  In  fact,  when  partially  covered 
with  the  eruptions,  the  sufferer  was  ceremonially  unclean;  when  these 
had  spread  over  his  whole  body,  he  was  clean  (cf.  art.  Disease  and 
Medicine,  Standard  Bible  Dictionary).  In  either  case,  however,  there 
is  nothing  to  prevent  the  incident  having  occurred  in  one  of  the 
Synagogues  mentioned  in  ver.  39,  since  provision  was  made  for  un- 
clean lepers  in  the  Synagogue,  under  restrictions  which  segregated 
them  from  the  congregation.  Doubtless,  it  took  place  at  the  close  of 
the  service,  or  perhaps  after  the  discourse  which  the  Master  had 
delivered — a  discourse  which  we  can  easily  believe  was  full  of  good 
news  to  all  who  suffered  and  were  heavy  laden  (cf.  Matt.  11  :  28,  and 
the  discourse  at  Nazareth,  Lk.  4  :  16-21,  which,  however,  was  largely 
determined  by  the  lesson  for  the  day).  As  far  as  we  have  record,  this 
was  the  first  case  of  this  disease  which  had  come  before  the  Master. 
It  was  not  brought  to  him  by  others.  Distinct  as  Jesus'  popularity 
was,  it  did  not  seem  yet  to  have  suggested  the  possibility  of  his  cur- 
ing this  malady.  It  was  a  case  of  the  sufferer's  desperate  faith  for 
himself. 

41,  42.  Moved  with  compassion — a  statement  made  here  only  by 
Mark  and  suggesting,  not  simply  sympathetic  narrative,  but  narra- 
tive from  the  viewpoint  of  a  personal  eyewitness  and  close  observer — 
carrying  along  the  personal  reminiscence  definitely  indicated  in  the 
previous  passage  (ver.  36) .  Touched  him — not  merely  the  customary 
symbolic  action  accompanying  cures  (5  :  23;  6:5;  7  :  33;  8  :  22f.; 
cf.  2  Kings  4  :  34;  5  :  11),  but  as  expressing  Jesus'  independence  of 
the  Mosaic  restrictions  in  the  case  of  this  disease.  Straightway: 
The  cure  resulting  was  immediate,  as  all  the  Evangelists  testify. 

43.  Strictly  charged  him  (better,  having  spoken  to  him  sternly). — 
A  striking  phrase,  pecuHar  to  Mark  and  representing,  not  any  anger 

51 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


44.  charged  him,  and  straightway  sent  him  out,  and  saith 
unto  him.  See  thou  say  nothing  to  any  man:  but  go 
show  thyself  to  the  priest,  and  offer  for  thy  cleansing 
the  things  which  Moses  commanded,  for  a  testimony 

45.  unto  them.    But  he  went  out,  and  began  to  publish 

on  Jesus'  part,  as  though  he  resented  the  leper's  presence  in  the 
place,  but  simply  a  strong  feeling  of  urgency  accompanying  the 
action  by  which  he  sent  him  out  and  the  command  in  which  he  en- 
joined him  to  say  nothing  to  any  man  (cf .  Matt.  9  :  30)  •  It  indicates 
the  intense  earnestness  involved  in  Jesus'  desire  that  the  man  should 
not,  by  indiscreet  proclamation  of  the  cure,  arouse  among  the  people 
a  sensational  enthusiasm  which  would  hinder  the  primary  work  for 
which  he  had  undertaken  the  tour— a  result  which  unfortunately 
actually  occurred  (ver.  45). 

44.  Show  thyself  to  the  priests:  This  is  in  no  way  connected  with 
Jesus'  desire  to  prevent  indiscreet  action  on  the  part  of  the  cured  man, 
as  though  by  a  subterfuge  he  would  secure  his  absence  from  the 
place.  From  the  case  of  the  ten  lepers  (Lk.  17  :  14)  it  is  clear  that  the 
command  would  have  been  given  whether  his  absence  was  desired  or 
not.  In  fact,  this  observance  of  the  ceremonial  law  in  connection  with 
the  previous  disregard  of  it  (ver.  41)  is  significant;  for  a  study  of 
Jesus'  attitude  toward  the  prohibitions  and  commands  of  the  cere- 
monial law— especially  towards  these  Rabbinic  refinements — dis- 
closes the  fact  that  those  regulations  which  symbolized  and  enforced 
man's  separation  from  God  and  from  his  fellow  men  Jesus  did  not 
hesitate  to  ignore  (cf.  Lk,  6  :  2;  7  :  14,  30;  Matt.  9  :  11,  14),  while 
those  which  represented  and  encouraged  his  communion  with  God 
and  his  fellowship  with  his  fellow  men  Jesus  was  careful  to  observe 
(cf.  Matt.  3  :  15;  Lk.  4  :  16;  ID  :  26-28).  This  is  the  explanation  of 
Jesus'  apparently  self-contradictory  attitude  towards  the  law  of 
leprosy  in  this  incident.  A  testimony  unto  them :  The  showing  of 
himself  to  the  priest  and  the  offering  of  the  prescribed  sacrifices 
would  be  evidence  to  them  of  his  cure  and  of  his  right  to  be  returned 
into  full  fellowship  with  the  people  of  God.  This  was  the  only  testi- 
mony Jesus  wanted  him  to  bear,  while,  for  his  own  sake,  it  was  the  one 
testimony  he  needed  to  bear. 

45.  No  more  openly  enter  into  a  city:  While  we  are  not  to  suppose 
that  this  was  the  only  incident  that  occurred  on  the  tour,  and  while 
we  are  given  no  information  as  to  whether  it  occurred  soon  after 
Jesus  left  Capernaum,  or  later,  it  is  clear  that  Mark  understands  its 
effect  was  practically  to  destroy  the  preaching  purpose  for  which  the 
tour  had  been  undertaken,  and  so  to  throng  him  with  a  curious  crowd 

52 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

it  much,  and  to  spread  abroad  the  ^  matter,  insomuch 
that  ^  Jesus  could  no  more  openly  enter  into  ^  a  city, 
but  was  without  in  desert  places:  and  they  came  to 
him  from  every  quarter. 

(C)  Return  to  Capernaum  and  Work  from  that  Centre^ 
2  :  1-7  :  23 

2.       And  when  he  entered  again  into  Capernaum  after 

2.  some  days,  it  was  noised  that  he  was  ^  in  the  house. 
And  many  were  gathered  together,  so  that  there  was 
no  longer  room  for  them,  no,  not  even  about  the  door: 

3.  and  he  spake  the  word  unto  them.    And  they  come, 

1  Grk.  word.  2  he.  3  the  city.  *  at  home. 

that  he  was  not  able  to  appear  publicly  in  the  streets  of  these  suburban 
towns,  but  was  compelled  to  carry  on  such  ministry  as  he  could  in  the 
outlying  desert  [unfrequented]  places,  and  even  there  the  miracle- 
expecting  multitude  crowded  upon  him  from  every  neighboring 
place. 

(i)  The  Healing  of  the  Paralytic,  2  :  1-12  (zj) 

2  :  I,  2.  In  the  house  (strictly,  at  home  or  indoors)  a  phrase  which 
would  be  perfectly  fitting,  whether  the  house  were  his  own  or  Simon's. 
No  longer  room  .  .  .  not  even  about  the  door:  The  tour  had  so 
increased  the  sensational  interest  in  Jesus'  miracle  powers  that  his 
return  to  Capernaum  was  marked  by  an  even  greater  multitude  about 
the  door  of  the  house,  the  populace  of  the  city  doubtless  being  added 
to  by  those  who  had  gathered  to  his  following  along  the  way. 
Spake  the  word:  From  Mark's  record  it  is  clear  that,  however  Jesus' 
purpose  to  preach  had  been  interfered  with  on  the  tour,  it  was  still 
being  persisted  in,  in  spite  of  the  greater  crowds  which  pressed  upon 
him.  That  his  work,  however,  was  not  confined  to  teaching  is  evi- 
dent, not  only  from  Luke's  statement  (5  :  17),  but  from  the  following 
incident,  which  was  doubtless  simply  selected  from  the  many  acts  of 
healing  which  he  again  performed  in  the  city. 

3.  Palsy — general  term  for  paralysis — the  loss  of  muscular  power 
resulting  from  injury  or  disease  of  the  brain  or  nervous  system. 
Specific  (trembling)  palsy  is  perhaps  referred  to  in  Jer.  23  :  9;  spinal 
meningitis,  possibly,  in  Matt.  8  :  6.  Bringing  .  .  .  borne  of  four: 
A  group  of  the  man's  friends  are  represented  as  bringing  him  to  the 

53 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

bringing  unto  him  a  man  sick  of  the  palsy,  borne  of 

4.  four.  And  when  they  could  not  ^  come  nigh  unto 
him  for  the  crowd,  they  uncovered  the  roof  where 
he  was:  and  when  they  had  broken  it  up,  they  let 

5.  down  the  ^  bed  whereon  the  sick  of  the  palsy  lay.  And 
Jesus  seeing  their  faith  saith  unto  the  sick  of  the 

6.  palsy,  ^  Son,  thy  sins  are  forgiven.  But  there  were 
certain  of  the  scribes  sitting  there,   and  reasoning 

7.  in  their  hearts.  Why  doth  this  man  thus  speak?  he 
blasphemeth:  who  can  forgive  sins  but  one,  even  God? 

1  Many  MSS.  read  bring  him  unto  him.  2  pallet.  »  Grk.  child. 

house,  lying  on  his  mattress — a  thickly  padded  quilt — which  was 
borne  by  four  (possibly  servants). 

4.  Uncovered  the  roof — the  covering  over  the  rooms  which  were 
located  around  the  open  court,  and  access  to  which  was  often  furnished 
by  stairs  on  the  outside  of  the  house  (13  :  15).  Broken  it  up  (lit. 
dug  it  out) :  This  covering  consisted  of  large  beams,  across  which  were 
laid  smaller  rafters  and  over  all  brushwood  or  reeds.  These  were 
covered  by  a  thick  layer  of  earth,  and  this  by  a  covering  of  plaster  or 
clay  and  sometimes  thin  stone  slabs  (Lk.  5  :  19).  Let  down  the 
bed:  The  house  was  most  likely,  a  one  story  structure,  and  the  Master 
was  speaking  in,  or  just  in  front  of,  the  principal  room,  which  was 
across  the  court,  opposite  the  entrance  from  the  street,  and  directly 
under   the   roof    (see   Tristam,   Eastern   Customs  in  Bible  Lands, 

PP-  33-36). 

5.  Seeing  their  faith — including  that  of  the  sufferer  himself:  It  was 
not  a  case  of  vicarious,  but  of  pergonal  faith.  In  fact,  from  other 
incidents  of  healing  it  is  reasonable  to  believe  that  the  sufferer's 
personal  interest  in  his  own  case  and  his  personal  conviction  as  to 
Jesus'  ability  were  the  inspiration  to  their  action  on  his  behalf  (cf. 
Jn.  5  :  7;  Mk.  10  :  46-48).  Thy  sins  are  forgiven — the  sins  which, 
possibly  in  fact,  and  certainly  in  the  man's  thought,  were  the  cause  of 
his  physical  condition  (cf.  Jn.  5  :  14).  However  unexpected  this 
may  have  been  to  the  man  and  his  friends  as  Jesus'  way  of  approach 
to  his  case,  it  was  realized  by  them  all  as  necessarily  involved  in  his 
healing;  since  they  shared  in  the  common  belief  that  sin  and  suffering 
were  intimately  linked  together  (cf.  Jn.  9:2;  Lk.  13  :  2). 

6.  7.  Reasoning  in  their  hearts:  Jesus'  action  was  as  startling  to 
the  Scribes  as  it  was  unexpected  to  the  paralytic  and  his  friends.   The 

54 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


8.  And  straightway  Jesus,  perceiving  in  his  spirit  that 
they  so  reasoned  within  themselves,  saith  unto  them, 

g.  Why  reason  ye  these  things  in  your  hearts?  Which 
is  easier,  to  say  to  the  sick  of  the  palsy.  Thy  sins  are 
forgiven;  or  to  say,  Arise,  and  take  up  thy  ^  bed,  and 

10.  walk?    But  that  ye  may  know  that  the  Son  of  man 
hath  authority  on  earth  to  forgive  sins  (he  saith  to 

11.  the  sick  of  the  palsy),  I  say  unto  thee,  Arise,  take 

1  pallet. 

questions  which  at  once  rose  up  within  them  are  vividly  reproduced 
by  Mark.  There  is  first  the  surprised  query,  Why  doth  this  man  thus 
speak?  This  query  is  then  formulated  in  a  positive  expression  of 
opinion:  He  blasphemeth.  Finally,  there  is  disclosed  the  reason  by 
which  the  opinion  was  justified  in  their  minds:  Who  can  forgive  sins 
but  one,  even  God?  The  protest  was  instinctive,  represented  their 
actual  state  of  mind,  and,  from  their  point  of  view,  was  perfectly 
justified.  What  they  resented  was,  not  Jesus'  assumption  of  the 
right  to  pronounce  absolution,  but  his  pronouncement  of  it  without 
apparent  ceremonial  requirement.  Priestly  absolution,  to  which  they 
were  accustonied,  was  always  dependent  upon  the  fulfilment  of  cere- 
monial conditions.  They  were  quick  to  realize  the  essential  opposi- 
tion of  Jesus'  assumption  to  the  whole  cultus  which  gave  them  stand- 
ing among  the  people.  They  did  not  appreciate — if  they  were  aware 
of  the  fact — that  the  real  underlying  condition  of  all  God's  forgiving 
was  the  personal  trust  of  the  soul  in  Him. 

8,  g.  Jesus,  consequently,  challenges  their  ceremonial  position. 
Which  is  easier  to  say  .  .  .  forgiven,  or  .  .  .  Arise  .  .  .  and  walk? 
It  would  seem  at  first  that  they  might  have  chosen  the  former  alterna- 
tive, since  it  was  in  a  hidden  field  of  action  without  apparently  any 
visible  proof  of  its  effectiveness;  but  in  reality  they  could  make  no 
choice  at  all,  since,  believing  as  they  did,  all  the  more  because  of  their 
ceremonialism,  that  sin  and  suffering  were  vitally  connected,  either 
would  be  equally  difi&cult.  Forgiveness  would  have  to  prove  itself 
by  a  resultant  cure,  and  cure  would  involve  a  precedent  forgiveness. 

ID,  II.  That  ye  may  know:  The  Master  does  not  commit  himself 
to  their  belief.  He  simply  cures  the  paralytic  and  thus  places  before 
them  an  object  lesson,  the  inference  from  which,  in  view  of  their 
position,  it  would  be  impossible  for  them  to  ignore.  Son  of  man — one 
of  the  latent  Messianic  terms  in  Jesus'  day,  derived  through  Apoc- 
alyptic usage  from  Dan.  7  :  13  and  adopted  by  Jesus,  because,  being 

55 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


12.  up  thy  ^  bed,  and  go  unto  thy  house.  And  he  arose, 
and  straightway  took  up  the  ^  bed,  and  went  forth 
before  them  all;  msomuch  that  they  were  all  amazed, 
and  glorified  God,  saying,  We  never  saw  it  on  this 
fashion. 

13.  And  he  went  forth  again  by  the  sea  side;  and  all 
the  multitude  resorted  unto  him,  and  he  taught  them. 

1  pallet. 

less  suggestive  to  the  popular  mind  of  Messianic  claims  (cf .  Jn.  1 2  :  34, 
and  note  that  during  his  ministry  this  term  is  never  applied  by  others 
to  Jesus),  it  enabled  him  to  carry  on  his  work  with  less  interference 
from  the  Messianic  misconceptions  of  the  people  and  their  political 
leaders  than  would  have  been  the  case  had  he  referred  to  himself  as 
"  Son  of  David,"  or  "  Son  of  God."  (Notice  how,  according  to  Mark's 
record,  these  two  terms  are  reserved  by  Jesus  until  the  close  of  his 
ministry,  while  the  term,  "Son  of  Man,"  is  used  but  twice  before  the 
confession  of  his  Messiahship  at  Cassarea  Philippi.)  As  used  by 
Jesus,  it  represents  his  claim  to  determine  authoritatively  the  religious 
life  and  destiny  of  man  (cf.  besides  our  passage,  2  :  28;  Lk.  12:8; 
19  :  10;  21  :  36;  Mk.  13  :  26). 

12.  Straightway:  As  in  the  previous  cases,  the  cure  is  immediate. 
All  amazed:  According  to  the  Evangelists,  the  impression  produced 
by  this  miracle  seems  to  have  been  peculiarly  strong  (cf.  5  :  42; 
6  :  51),  Matthew  and  Luke  adding  to  Mark's  statement  the  fact 
that  the  people  were  filled  with  fear,  while  Matthew  states  that  the 
reason  for  their  praise  of  God  was  that  he  had  given  such  authority 
[to  forgive  sins]  unto  men,  showing  (i)  that  paralysis  was,  in  the 
popular  experience,  a  far  more  serious  malady  than  fever,  demonism, 
or  even  leprosy;  and  (2)  that  the  crowd  had  caught  no  Messianic 
claim  in  the  title  "Son  of  man,"  though  from  Matthew's  statement 
they  seem  to  have  recognized  the  spiritual  point  at  which  the  claim 
had  been  made.  With  the  Scribes,  however,  the  recognition  was 
clear  and  unquestioned.  They  saw  intuitively  the  conflict  between 
the  spiritual  principle  represented  in  Jesus'  action  and  the  ceremonial 
principle  of  their  own  position.  These  two  principles,  they,  as  well  as 
Jesus,  realized  could  never  coexist.  Conflict  between  them  was 
inevitable  and  had  to  come  to  issue  as  soon  as  the  one  challenged  the 
other  in  its  claim  to  determine  the  people's  religious  living. 

13.  Went  forth  again:  Mark  is  the  only  one  who  gives  a  narrative 
introduction  to  the  call  of  Matthew,  and,  while  it  contains  no  note 
of  time,  it  seems  most  naturally  to  follow  immediately  upon  the 

56 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

14.  And  as  he  passed  by,  he  saw  Levi  the  son  of  Alphajus 
sitting  at  the  place  of  toll,  and  he  saith  unto  him, 
Follow  me.    And  he  arose  and  followed  him. 

15,  And  it  came  to  pass,  that  he  was  sitting  at  meat 
in  his  house,  and  many  publicans  and  sinners  sat 
down  with  Jesus  and  his  disciples :  for  there  were  many, 

cure  of  the  paralytic.  This  cure  had  challenged  the  Scribes  with 
an  object  lesson  which  was  a  sufficient  reply  to  their  criticism,  with- 
out added  comment  on  Jesus'  part.  The  instruction  which  might 
have  been  expected  to  follow  it  was  thus  reserved  for  the  people  and 
given  on  the  open  beach  by  the  sea,  where  the  thronging  multitude 
might  better  be  reached  by  his  words.  (See  an  apparently  similar 
occasion,  3  :  7-9.)  There  ail  the  multitude  resorted  unto  him,  and 
he  taught  them.  (Notice  how  Jesus  selects  the  seaside  for  his  teach- 
ing at  Capernaum,  Lk.  5  :  1-3;  Mk.  3  :  7-9;  4  :  if.). 

(2)  The  Call  of  Levi,  2  :  14-22 

14.  Levi — the  Jewish  name  of  Matthew,  which  was  later  assumed 
(or  given),  as  was  frequent  with  the  Jews  upon  entering  on  a  new 
career  (cf.  Jn.  i  :  42,  and  note  thus  the  significance  of  Rev.  2  :  17), 
the  son  of  Alphaeus,  not  to  be  identified  with  Alphaeus,  the  father 
of  James  the  Less  (3  :  18).  At  the  place  of  toll — a  customs  station 
on  the  main  caravan  route  between  Syria  and  Egypt,  which  passed 
along  the  seaside  into  Capernaum,  marking  the  frontier  between 
the  tetrarchy  of  Herod  Philip  and  that  of  Herod  Antipas;  conse- 
quently an  important  station  calling  for  many  ofiicials.  Follow  me: 
This  command  and  its  instant  response  assume  not  only  an  ac- 
quaintance on  Jesus'  part  with  Levi's  character,  but  also  an  interest 
in,  as  well  as  an  acquaintance  with,  Jesus''  teaching  on  the  part  of 
Levi.  This  easily  could  have  come  through  the  ministry  which  Jesus 
had  already  accomplished  in  Capernaum;  might  indeed  have  re- 
sulted from  what  Levi  had  seen  and  heard  of  Jesus'  discourses  by  the 
sea;  in  fact,  might  have  been  the  fruitage  of  this  single  discourse  which, 
because  of  its  background  in  the  paralytic's  cure,  entered  more  into 
the  character  of  Jesus'  own  mission  and  challenged  to  his  following 
those  to  whom  it  appealed. 

15.  In  his  house,  i.e.  Levi's,  as  would  be  natural  in  the  case  of  a 
newly  chosen  disciple  (cf.  Lk.  19  :  1-6),  and  is  confirmed  by  the 
definite  statement  of  Luke  (5  :  29).  Publicans — collectors  of  p7iblic 
revenue,  a  term  applicable  to  receivers  of  import  duties,  as  well  as  to 
gatherers  of  internal  taxes,  in  the  system  of  taxation  carried  on  under 

57 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

1 6.  and  they  followed  him.  And  the  scribes  ^  of  the  Phari- 
sees, when  they  saw  that  he  was  eating  with  the 
sinners  and  publicans,  said  unto  his  disciples,  ^  How 
is  it  that  he  eateth  ^  and  drinketh  with  publicans 

1  Some  MSS.  read  and  the  Pharisees.  2  Some  MSS.  omit  He  eateth. 

3  Some  MSS.  omit  and  drinketh. 

the  Procurators  of  the  Roman  Provinces;  though  in  Galilee,  which 
was  a  part  of  the  autonomous  tetrarchy  of  Herod  Antipas,  the  taxa- 
tion was  not  administered  by  the  Roman  Government,  but  by  Herod 
himself  for  his  own  use.  At  the  same  time,  Herod,  being  an  appointee 
of  Rome,  the  system  was  looked  upon  by  the  people  as  part  of  the 
oppressors'  rule;  while  being  managed  in  Galilee,  as  everywhere,  on 
the  farming  out  principle,  it  was  administered  with  an  extortion  (cf. 
Lk.  3  :  i2f.;  19  :  i-io)  that  made  its  ofiBcials,  especially  when  Jews, 
genuinely  hated  by  the  People  and  despised  by  the  religious  leaders 
(cf.  Matt.  18  :  17),  Sinners — not  social  outcasts,  as  the  woman  in 
Lk.  7:37,  but  the  religiously  unchurched,  as  in  Gal.  2  :  15 — most 
likely  here  the  general  class  of  native  oflScials,  who  because  of  their 
necessary  intercourse  and  life  with  non-Jews,  had  come  to  be 
counted  and  to  count  themselves  as  no  longer  belonging  to  the 
congregation  of  Israel,  who  righteously  observed  the  law.  There 
were  many:  Capernaum  being  not  only  an  important  customs  post 
on  the  frontier  of  Herod's  territory,  but  one  of  the  centres  of  his  in- 
ternal government  (see  note  on  i  :  21),  this  class  of  tax  gatherers 
and  general  ofiBcials  is  likely  to  have  been  large.  Matthew's  pur- 
pose in  asking  them  to  this  feast  was  that  they  might  become  ac- 
quainted with  his  new  Master;  while  Jesus'  motive  in  having  social 
fellowship  with  them  was  that  he  might  thus  follow  up  the  aggressive 
steps  he  had  taken  against  ceremonial  Judaism  in  calling  to  his  dis- 
cipleship  one  like  Matthew  who,  not  only  from  the  Scribes'  point  ot 
view  was  religiously  outlawed,  but  from  the  people's  point  of  view 
was  outcast  from  the  nation.  It  was  an  object  lesson  for  both  Scribes 
and  people  alike,  not  so  much  of  the  essentially  spiritual  character  of 
his  ministry,  as  of  its  essential  opposition  to  the  artificial,  tyrannical, 
and  hypocritical  self-righteous  standards  which  the  religious  rulers 
had  set  up  in  Judaism.  It  was,  in  brief,  a  bold  appeal  to  the  human 
heart  that  needed  God. 

16.  Scribes  of  the  Pharisees — those  who  belonged  to  the  strict 
sect  of  the  Pharisees  (cf.  Acts  23  :  9),  the  religious  party  which  stood 
for  the  uncompromising  separation  from  everything  non-Jewish  and 
for  the  scrupulous  observance  of  the  Law.  Said  unto  his  disciples : 
Their  opposition  had  been  silent  at  the  healing  of  the  paralytic;  it 
was  not  yet  bold  enough  to  address  its  criticism  directly  to  the  Master. 

58 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


17.  and  sinners?  And  when  Jesus  heard  it,  he  saith  unto 
them,  They  that  are  ^  whole  have  no  need  of  a  physi- 
cian, but  they  that  are  sick:  I  came  not  to  call  the 
righteous,  but  sinners. 

18.  And  John's  disciples  and  the  Pharisees  were 
fasting:  and  they  come  and  say  unto  him,  Why 
do  John's  disciples  and   the  disciples  of  the  Phari- 

19.  sees  fast,  but  thy  disciples  fast  not?  And  Jesus 
said  unto  them,  Can  the  sons  of  the  bridechamber 
fast,  while  the  bridegroom  is  with  them?  as  long  as 
they  have  the  bridegroom  with  them,  they  cannot  fast. 

1  strong. 

Eateth  and  drinketh:  The  ground  of  their  criticism  was  that  this 
denationalized  and  unchurched  class  was  no  class  with  which  a  Jewish 
teacher  should  have  social  intercourse. 

17.  They  that  are  whole  .  .  .  that  are  sick:  Again  the  Master 
takes  the  point  of  view  of  the  Scribes.  On  the  basis  of  their  claim 
to  be  religiously  strong  and  well,  they  needed  no  service  from  him, 
but  these  whom  they  held  to  be  religiously  weak  and  diseased  had 
need  of  his  ministry;  for  he  had  not  come  to  summon  to  his  following 
the  legally  righteous,  but  those  who  were  counted  legally  sinners. 

18.  Were  fasting — most  likely  at  the  time  of  the  asking  of  the  ques- 
tion, which,  according  to  Mark,  was  put  to  the  Master,  not  neces- 
sarily by  the  Baptist's  disciples  (as  in  Matthew),  but  by  persons 
(not  the  Scribes)  who  knew  the  facts  and  were  puzzled  for  an  ex- 
planation (as  in  Luke).  Why  do  John's  disciples  .  .  .  and  ...  of 
the  Pharisees  fast,  but  thy  disciples  fast  not?  The  thing  difficult 
to  understand  was  that,  though  there  was  a  sympathy  between  the 
disciples  of  the  Baptist  and  Jesus,  which  was  wholly  lacking  between 
them  and  the  Pharisees  (cf.  Matt.  3  :  yf.),  yet  in  common  with  the 
Pharisees  they  observed  the  custom  of  the  semi-weekly  fast  (cf. 
Lk.  18  :  12)  which  Jesus  apparently  made  no  attempt  to  enjoin  upon 
his  disciples  (cf.  Lk.  11  :  i  for  what  might  have  been  expected  as  to 
such  enjoining). 

19.  20.  Sons  of  the  bridechamber — the  particular  friends  of  the 
bridegroom,  who  were  responsible  for  the  successful  carrying  out  of 
the  wedding  festivities  and  accompanied  the  bridegroom  to  the 
house  of  the  bride  (cf.  Jud.  14  :  lof.).  The  significance  of  Jesus' 
reply  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  is  made  in  the  words  that  the  Baptist 

59 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

20.  But  the  days  will  come,  when  the  bridegroom  shall 
be  taken  away  from  them,  and  then  will  they  fast  in 

21.  that  day.  No  man  seweth  a  piece  of  undressed  cloth 
on  an  old  garment:  else  that  which  should  fill  it  up 
taketh  from  it,  the  new  from  the  old,  and  a  worse 

22.  rent  is  made.  And  no  man  putteth  new  wine  into 
old  wine-skins;  else  the  wine  will  burst  the  skins, 
and  the  wine  perisheth,  and  the  skins:  but  they  put 
new  wine  into  fresh  wine-skins. 


had  already  used  with  reference  to  him  (Jn,  3  :  29!. ).  Had  the  mean- 
ing of  these  words  been  fully  appreciated,  the  questioners  would  not 
have  been  at  a  loss  to  understand  the  freedom  of  the  religious  living 
of  Jesus'  disciples;  for  if  the  Baptist,  as  the  friend  of  the  Bridegroom, 
could  rejoice  in  the  Bridegroom's  happiness,  even  though  it  meant 
the  disappearance  of  himself  from  view,  then  surely  those  who  stood 
in  closer  and  more  constant  companionship  with  the  Bridegroom 
than  did  he,  could  not  be  mournful  and  sad  as  long  as  the  Bridegroom 
was  with  them.  The  days  will  come:  When  the  Bridegroom  is  taken 
from  them,  they  will  fast;  but  then  their  fasting  would  be  an  expres- 
sion of  their  real  sorrow  and  not  a  mere  ceremonial  form.  This 
reference  to  a  coming  forceful  taking  away  of  the  Bridegroom  is  the 
first  intimation  by  Jesus,  in  the  Synoptic  narrative,  of  the  fate  that 
he  foresaw  awaited  him,  a  fate  which,  if  not  suggested,  was  easily 
confirmed  in  its  forecast  by  the  imprisonment  of  the  Baptist  which 
had  already  taken  place  (i  :  14). 

21,  22.  If  in  their  hearts  the  questioners  demurred  to  this  answer 
of  Jesus,  as  they  considered  that,  while  the  Baptist  rejoiced  in  the 
Bridegroom's  voice,  he  did  not  express  his  joy  by  neglect  of  fasting, 
it  would  be  only  a  confession  of  the  necessary  narrowness  of  spirit 
which  belonged  to  him  as  a  representative  of  the  Old  Dispensation. 
It  is  this  essential  difference  in  the  spirit  of  the  two  Dispensations 
that  Jesus  brings  out  in  these  two  parabolic  sayings  about  the  un- 
dressed cloth  and  the  new  wine — by  which  he  shows  the  impossi- 
biUty  of  carrying  on  his  work  in  true  accord  with  all  its  significant 
newness  of  character  and  still  subjecting  it  to  the  old  forms  which 
belonged  to  the  preparatory  work  which  had  gone  before.  In  both 
sayings  Jesus  represents  the  situation  as  one  in  which  a  new  thing  is 
placed  in  old  surroundings,  with  the  result  that  the  strength  and 
vitality  of  the  new  thing  destroys  the  weakness  of  the  old  surround- 
ing and  really  injures  itself  and  the  situation  in  the  attempt.    Un- 

60 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

23.  And  it  came  to  pass,  that  he  was  going  on  the  sab- 
bath day  through  the  grainfields;  and  his  disciples 

24.  began,  as  they  went,  to  pluck  the  ears.     And  the 
Pharisees  said  unto  him,  Behold,  why  do  they  on  the 

25.  sabbath  day  that  which  is  not  lawful?    And  he  said 

dressed  cloth — unbleached  cloth,  which  in  its  shrinking  tears  away 
from  that  to  which  it  has  been  sewed.  New  wine — fresh,  unfer- 
niented  wine,  whose  process  of  fermentation  the  old,  hard,  unelastic, 
perhaps  thin  worn  and  patched  up  (cf.  Josh.  9  :  4)  skins  would  not  be 
able  to  withstand. 

(j)  The  Sabbath  Journey  through  the  Grain  Field,  2  :  23-28 

23.  Grain  fields  (lit.,  smvn  fields) — fields  sown  with  seed  which  was 
growing  up  into  crops, — in  this  case,  probably  either  barley  or  wheat, 
which  were  the  principal  grain  crops  of  Palestine,  both  being  sown 
in  the  late  fall  and  harvested  in  the  spring.  As  the  grain  was  ripe 
enough  for  eating,  the  harvest  was  doubtless  near  at  hand.  As  this 
generally  lasted  the  seven  weeks  from  Passover  to  Pentecost,  the 
time  of  the  incident  could  not  have  been  long  before  Passover,  was 
more  probably  after  it.  Began,  as  they  went,  to  pluck  (lit.,  Began 
to  make  their  way  plucking) — a  phrase  of  possible  Latin  origin,  used 
here  loosely  to  give  the  idea,  not  of  breaking  through  the  standing 
grain  by  beating  down  the  stalks,  which  was  evidently  not  the  thing 
for  which  they  were  criticized,  but  of  progress  through  the  fields 
while  the  plucking  was  going  on. 

24.  Not  lawful:  The  point  of  the  criticism  was  not  the  fact  of 
plucking  (and  eating — Matthew  and  Luke)  the  grain  which  belonged 
to  others;  since  this  was  expressly  allowed,  provided  no  reaping  in- 
strument was  used,  which  would  make  the  gathering  a  matter  of 
profit  and  not  simply  of  satisfying  personal  hunger  (Deut.  23  :  25). 
What  was  criticized  was  the  plucking  on  the  Sabbath.  The  law  for- 
bade all  work  on  the  Sabbath  (Ex.  20  :  8-1 1;  35  :  2) — expressly  all 
Sabbath  work  in  time  of  planting  and  reaping  (Ex.  34  :  21);  but  it 
did  not  enter  into  the  details  of  what  constituted  such  work.  This 
the  Rabbis  did,  however,  holding  that  plucking  was  equivalent  to 
reaping,  since  the  hand  took  the  place  of  the  sickle,  while  the  rubbing 
to  which  Luke  refers  (6:1)  and  which  naturally  must  have  preceded 
the  eating,  involved  the  hand  as  a  threshing  machine.  The  Rabbinic 
refinements  of  the  ceremonial  law  are  thus  assumed  as  equally  binding 
with  the  ceremonial  law  itself. 

25.  26.  What  David  did:  The  reference  is  to  i  Sam.  21  :  1-7, 
which  relates  how  David  in  his  flight  from  Saul  came  to  Nob  and 

61 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

unto   them,  Did   ye   never  read   what   David  did, 
when  he  had  need,  and  was  hungry,  he,  and  they  that 

26.  were  with  him?  How  he  entered  into  the  house  of 
God  ^  when  Abiathar  was  high  priest,  and  ate  the 
show-bread,  which  it  is  not  lawful  to  eat  save  for  the 
priests,  and  gave  also  to  them  that  were  with  him? 

27.  And  he  said  unto  them.  The  sabbath  was  made  for 

1  Some  MSS.  read  in  the  days  of  Abiathar  the  high  priest. 

demanded  the  hallowed  bread  from  the  priest  for  himself  and  his 
companions.  The  point  of  Jesus'  reply  is  that,  admitting  in  general 
the  binding  character  of  the  ceremonial  law  (the  Rabbinic  refine- 
ments are  wholly  ignored),  its  obligation  had  been  set  aside  at  times 
of  need  in  their  own  sacred  history,  the  inference  being  that  if  David 
could  not  be  blamed  for  what  he  had  done,  neither  could  his  dis- 
ciples; for  the  same  need  was  present  in  both  cases.  Abiathar — an 
error  for  Ahimelech,  possibly  influenced  by  the  near  relationship  of 
the  two,  regarding  which,  however,  there  appears  to  be  confusion 
in  the  Old  Testament  itself  (cf.  i  Sam.  22  :  20;  11  Sam.  8:17; 
I  Chron.  18  :  16).  Matthew  adds  another  argument  from  the  cus- 
tom of  the  priests  in  the  Temple  to  work  on  the  Sabbath  in  the 
prosecution  of  their  sacred  duties,  the  inference  being  drawn  by  Jesus 
that  if  association  with  the  Temple  allowed  the  priests  to  set  aside 
the  law,  his  disciples  were  equally  privileged  through  their  associa- 
tion with  him,  who  was  superior  to  the  Temple  (Matt.  12  :  5-7). 

27,  28.  The  Sabbath  was  made  for  man — a  gnomic  statement — 
a  form  used  by  Jesus  on  more  than  one  occasion  (cf.  Matt.  6  :  21; 
12  :  28,  45;  15  :  11).  It  announces  the  principle  that  the  Sabbath 
was  not  an  eternal  law  of  God  in  subservience  to  which  man  was 
created,  but  a  divine  ordinance  instituted  with  special  reference  to 
serving  man  in  his  religious  life.  It  followed,  therefore,  not  only 
that  man  was  to  be  master  over  the  day  and  not  slave  to  it,  but  that 
he  who  was  Son  of  man  had  a  special  lordship  over  its  regulation 
and  use  by  man. 

This  shows  that  Jesus  understood  his  title  to  involve  a  representa- 
tive relationship  to  man,  not  merely  in  the  sense  of  being  man's 
servant,  but  in  the  sense  of  being  the  director  and  arbiter  in  man's 
religious  living.  Jesus  thus  meets  the  Pharisees'  criticism  of  his  dis- 
ciples, not  only  with  a  clear  justification  of  their  action,  but  with  a 
new  claim  for  himself  and  his  relation  to  man  in  his  religious  living. 

The  situation  is  a  distinct  advance  upon  that  at  the  healing  of  the 
Paralytic  (2  :  1-12).    There  the  natural  resentment  at  Jesus'  claim  to 

62 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

28.  man,  and  not  man  for  the  sabbath:  so  that  the  Son 

of  man  is  lord  even  of  the  sabbath. 
3.      And  he  entered  again  into  the  synagogue;  and  there 

2.  was  a  man  there  who  had  his  hand  withered.    And 
they  watched  him,  whether  he  would  heal  him  on  the 

3.  sabbath  day;  that  they  might  accuse  him.     And  he 

forgive  sin  is  answered  by  a  single  puzzling  question,  which  took  the 
Pharisees  at  their  own  point  of  view,  following  it  up  with  a  plain  ob- 
ject lesson  which  practically  closed  the  door  to  further  discussion. 
Here  the  purely  ceremonial  criticism  is  met  with  a  presentation  of  the 
deep  underlying  principles  involved,  followed  with  an  announcement 
of  personal  claims  that  constituted  a  new  revelation  of  his  relation  to 
the  religious  life  of  man.  It  is  a  significant  fact  that  Jesus  had  not 
just  now  begun  this  liberal  custom  of  Sabbath  observance.  This  had 
been  his  position  from  the  first  (cf.  i  :  21-31).  Whatever  the  Scribes 
and  Pharisees  may  have  thought  and  said  about  it,  they  had  been 
confronted  with  it  all  the  time.  He  had  not  adopted  this  liberalism, 
in  order  to  force  an  issue  with  his  enemies;  rather  his  enemies,  aroused 
by  the  growing  popularity  of  his  ministry,  had  adopted  this  criticism, 
in  order  to  force  an  issue  with  him.  Jesus  was  not  conducting  a 
campaign;  he  was  living  a  life,  delivering  a  message,  accomplishing  a 
work,  self-consistent  in  its  principles  from  the  start  (see  note  on  i  :  44). 

{4)  The  Sabbath  Healing  of  the  Man  with  the  Withered  Hand  3 :  1-5 

3:1.  Entered  again  into  a  Synagogue:  Mark  (with  Lk.  6  :  6  and 
in  contrast  to  Matt.  12  .-9)  gives  no  definite  statement  of  time  for  this 
event.  Withered  hand  (Lk.  6  :  6,  right  hand) — an  atrophy  of  the 
muscles,  not  only  of  the  hand  itself,  but  also  of  the  lower  arm  (cf. 
ver.  5),  resulting  in  their  shrinking  and  due  probably  to  injury  or 
disease  of  the  nerves  controlling  them.  Similar  cases  are  referred  to 
in  Jn.  5  :  3.  Most  likely  the  impotent  man  of  ver.  7  suffered  from  this 
affliction.  The  case  of  Acts  3  :  2  was  probably  one  of  congenital 
defect.    (See  story  of  Jeroboam,  i  Kings  13  :  4-6.) 

2.  Watched  him  .  .  .  accuse  him— showing  a  distinct  develop- 
ment of  hostility.  It  is  not  now  simply  a  resentment  against  his 
claims  of  religious  authority,  nor  even  a  desire  to  force  an  issue  with 
him  in  the  matter  of  ceremonial  observance,  but  a  definite  purpose  to 
secure  evidence  which  they  might  use  against  him  before  the  Sanhe- 
drin.  The  Rabbis  permitted  healing  on  the  Sabbath  only  when  life 
was  in  danger.  Should  he  go  beyond  this  limitation,  they  would 
charge  him  as  having,  in  this  transgression  of  the  Sabbath  law, 
assailed  an  essential  institution  of  their  religion. 

63 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

saith  unto  the  man  that  had  his  hand  withered,  ^  Stand 

4.  forth.  And  he  saith  unto  them,  Is  it  lawful  on  the 
sabbath  day  to  do  good,  or  to  do  harm?  to  save  a 

5.  life,  or  to  kill?  But  they  held  their  peace.  And  when 
he  had  looked  round  about  on  them  with  anger,  being 
grieved  at  the  hardening  of  their  heart,  he  saith  unto 
the  man.  Stretch  forth  thy  hand.    And  he  stretched 

1  Grk.  arise  into  the  midst. 

3,  4.  Stand  forth — doubtless  in  the  open  space  in  front  of  the 
reader's  desk.  The  man  was  evidently  well  up  towards  the  front  of 
the  Congregation,  either  through  his  natural  desire  to  be  where  he 
could  attract  Jesus'  attention,  or  possibly  even  through  malicious 
arrangement  by  the  Pharisees,  to  be  where  he  would  catch  Jesus'  eye. 
The  Pharisees  themselves  were  in  the  "chief  seats,"  which  they 
loved  (cf.  Matt.  23  :  6;  also  Lk.  14  :  7).  To  do  good,  or  to  do  harm: 
The  latter  is  not  simply  the  negative  of  the  former,  but  the  positive 
of  its  opposite  and  always  in  the  New  Testament  implies  an  evil  moral 
spirit  behind  it  (cf.  i  Pet.  3  :  17;  3  Jn.  ver.  11).  This  alternative 
leads  up  to  the  stronger  one,  to  save  a  life,  or  to  kill?  which  possibly 
looks  forward  to  their  final  action  (ver.  6).  Instead  of  debating  with 
the  Pharisees  the  question  of  Sabbath  healing  in  itself,  which  would 
have  been  fruitless,  he  lifts  the  question  up  to  the  level  of  principle, 
and  on  that  level  puts  to  them  this  question,  which  it  was  impossible 
for  them  to  answer  save  in  one  way,  and  that  way  condemned  their 
own  position.  Jesus  thus  brought  clearly  to  light  the  issue  between 
himself  and  his  accusers:  Was  his  doing  good,  his  healing  on  the 
Sabbath,  a  justification  for  their  taking  counsel  against  his  own 
life,  as  in  reality  they  were  intending  to  do?  Naturally,  they  held 
their  peace,  being  convicted  of  their  utterly  unreasonable  position 
and  yet  being  stubbornly  unwilling  to  admit  its  wrongness.  Matthew 
adds  an  illustration  (12  :  4f .)  which  he  has  probably  inserted  from 
another  similar  scene  (cf.  Lk.  13  :  i4f.,  14  :  3-5). 

5.  Looked  round  about  .  .  .  with  anger:  Mark  alone  gives  this 
graphic  description  of  the  scene,  adding  to  it  the  reason  for  the  feelings: 
being  grieved  at  the  hardening  of  their  heart — showing  that,  how- 
ever from  a  formal  point  of  view  Jesus'  condemnation  of  the  Pharisees 
may  have  been  directed  against  their  ceremonialism,  from  the  personal 
point  of  view  it  was  directed  against  the  stubborn  set  of  their  will, 
which  recognized  the  truth,  but  would  not  act  upon  it.  This  throws 
light  upon  the  direction  of  his  constant  appeal  in  the  case  of  his 
disciples.    It  was  to  the  will  as  involved  in  their  personal  attitude  of 

64 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

6.  it  forth;  and  his  hand  was  restored.  And  the  Pharisees 
went  out,  and  straightway  with  the  Herodians  took 
counsel  against  him,  how  they  might  destroy  him. 

7.  And  Jesus  with  his  disciples  withdrew  to  the  sea :  and 
a  great  multitude  from  Galilee  followed;  and  from 

faith  in  him.  As  a  consequence,  he  accepted  those  who  exercised  that 
will,  though  unaccompanied  with  emotion  (e.g.  Matthew),  or  intel- 
lectual equipment  (e.g.  the  Woman  who  touched  his  garment). 
Emotion  and  knowledge  could  develop  and  grow;  the  deciding  element 
lay  in  the  initial  act  of  the  will.  Stretch  forth  thy  hand:  In  view  of 
the  desire  to  accuse  Jesus  of  an  unlawful  work  of  healing  on  the 
Sabbath,  the  conspicuous  absence  of  all  external  means  towards  the 
cure  is  significant.  Stretched  it  forth  .  .  .  restored:  The  instant 
response  of  the  will  resulted  in  an  instant  cure. 

(5)  Connecting  Narrative  of  Incidents,  3  :  6-12 

6.  Herodians — the  political  adherents  and  supporters  of  the 
Herod  dynasty,  having  as  their  aim  the  restoration  of  the  monarchy 
under  the  pagan- Jewish  rule  of  the  Herods.  They  favored  thus  the 
fusion  of  Judaism  and  Hellenism,  which  was  the  ideal  of  Herod  the 
Great  and  the  stated  policy  of  his  sons  and,  as  far  as  religious  opinions 
were  concerned,  sympathized  with  the  worldliness  of  the  Sadducees 
rather  than  with  the  legalism  of  the  Pharisees.  They  are  mentioned 
again  in  the  final  week  of  Jesus'  mmistry  in  Jerusalem,  when,  in 
combination  with  the  Pharisees,  they  are  sent  by  the  Sadducees  to 
attempt  to  entangle  Jesus  in  his  talk  (Mk.  12  :  13),  and  are  referred  to 
indirectly  in  the  advice  given  by  Jesus  to  his  disciples  towards  the 
close  of  his  North  Galilean  work  (Mk.  8  :  15).  Counsel  .  .  .  destroy 
him:  Although  the  Herodians  were  specially  attached  to  Herod 
Antipas  and  had  their  home  in  Galilee  rather  than  in  Judaea,  the 
development  of  the  Pharisaic  hostility  towards  Jesus  to  the  degree  of 
plotting  against  his  life  belongs  so  distinctively  to  the  close  of  his 
ministry  that  it  seems  more  than  probable  that  this  healing  of  the 
Withered  Hand  is  a  later  event  brought  forward  by  Mark  to  group 
it  with  the  only  other  incident  of  controversy  over  Sabbath  observ- 
ance which  his  Gospel  contains. 

Connecting  Narrative,  Disclosing  Jesus'  Popularity,  3 :  7-12 

7,  8.  Withdrew  to  the  sea — in  order  to  escape  the  pressure  of  the 
crowds  in  the  city  (cf.  2  :  13;  4  :  if.).  Matthew  connects  it  definitely 
with  Jesus'  knowledge  of  this  plot;  but  such  a  plot,  even  if  planned  at 

65 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

8.  Judaea,  and  from  Jerusalem,  and  from  Idumaea,  and 
beyond  the  Jordan,  and  about  Tyre  and  Sidon,  a  great 
multitude,  hearing  ^  what  great  things  he  did,  came 

9.  unto  him.  And  he  spake  to  his  disciples,  that  a  little 
boat  should  wait  on  him  because  of  the  crowd,  lest  they 

10.  should  throng  him:  for  he  had  healed  many;  insomuch 
that  as  many  as  had  plagues  pressed  upon  him  that 

11.  they  might  touch  him.  And  the  unclean  spirits,  when- 
soever they  beheld  him,  fell  down  before  him,  and 

12.  cried,  saying.  Thou  art  the  Son  of  God.  And  he 
charged  them  much  that  they  should  not  make  him 
known. 

13.  And  he  goeth  up  into  the  mountain,  and  calleth  unto 

^All  the  things  that  he  did. 

this  time,  was  not  likely  to  be  executed  immediately,  and  not  likely  to 
be  avoided  by  such  a  temporary  expedient.  A  great  multitude 
from  Judaea  .  .  .  Jerusalem  .  .  .  Idumaea  .  .  .  beyond  the  Jor- 
dan .  .  .  about  Tyre  and  Sidon  .  .  .  hearing  what  great  things  he 
did:  The  geographical  region  from  which  the  crowds  were  gathered 
was  extensive,  but  the  attraction  which  drew  them  was  evidently 
nothing  beyond  the  report  of  his  wonderful  works  of  healing  (cf.  vs. 
10-12). 

9.  A  little  boat  .  .  .  lest  they  should  throng  him — as  he  had  done 
at  the  calhng  of  the  first  disciples  (Lk.  5:3),  and  later,  at  the  de- 
livering of  the  parables  (Mk.  4:1);  though  in  the  present  case  he  does 
not  seem  to  have  used  it,  because  of  his  constant  occupation  with  the 
cases  of  healing  on  the  beach. 

10-12.  Plagues  (lit.  whips,  scourges) — distressing  bodily  diseases, 
involving  the  idea,  not  only  of  acute  suffering,  but  of  divine  chastise- 
ment (Ps.  89  :  32).  Pressed  upon  him  (lit.  fell  upon  him) — showing 
their  intense  eagerness  to  be  healed,  as  is  further  indicated  by  their 
conviction  that  the  cure  would  result  if  only  they  might  touch  him 
(cf.  5  :  27ff.;  6  :  56;  8  :  22;  Acts  5  :  15;  19  :  iif.).  Whensoever, 
(or,  as  soon  as)  .  .  .  fell  down  before  him,  in  fearsome  dread,  rather 
than  worshipful  homage  (see  note  on  i  :  24).  Charged  them  .  .  . 
should  not  make  him  known — not  to  restrict  the  further  spread  of  his 
popularity,  but  rather  to  avoid  a  conviction  of  his  Messiahship  on 
the  people's  part  through  such  channels  (see  note  on  i  :  25). 

66 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

him  whom  he  himself  would;  and  they  went  unto  him. 

14.  And  he  appointed  twelve,^  that  they  might  be  with 

15.  him,  and  that  he  might  send  them  forth  to  preach, 

16.  and  to  have  authority  to  cast  out  demons:  ^  and  Simon 

17.  he  surnamed  Peter;  and  ^  James  the  son  of  Zebedee, 
and  John  the  brother  of  ^  James;  and  them  he  sur- 

18.  named  Boanerges,  which  is,  Sons  of  thunder:  and  An- 
drew, and  Philip,  and  Bartholomew,  and  Matthew, 
and  Thomas,  and  ^  James,  the  son  of  Alphaeus,  and 

1  Some  MSS.  add  whom  also  he  named  apostles. 

^  Some  MSS.  insert  and  read  and  he  appointed  twelve  (and  he  gave  a  name  to  Simon) 
Peter  and  James,  etc.  3  Jacob. 

(6)  The  Choice  of  the  Twelve,  j  :  13-19  (21) 

13.  The  mountain — the  mountain  near  at  hand  (cf.  5  :  11;  6  146, 
as  the  sea  by  Capernaum,  2  :  13;  3  :  7),  that  is,  the  hills  back  from  the 
Lake  (cf.  5:5;  13  :  14;  also  Gen.  19  :  17;  Jud.  i  :  19).  Specific 
mountains  are  designated  by  distinguishing  terms  (cf.  9:2;  11  :  i). 
Luke  gives  the  purpose  of  this  withdrawal  as  prayer,  but  represents 
the  prayer,  which  continued  through  the  night,  as  preliminary  to  the 
choice  of  the  Twelve  (6  :  i2f.).  Whom  he  himself  would:  The  em- 
phatic introduction  of  the  pronoun  makes  clear  Jesus'  personal  choice 
in  the  calling:  while  the  usage  elsewhere  of  the  verb  calleth  would  seem 
to  indicate  that  Jesus  always  directed  it,  when  not  to  the  disciples 
themselves,  at  least  to  the  sympathetic  portion  of  the  crowd  (cf. 
3  :  23;  7  :  14;  8  :34). 

14,  15.  Appointed  twelve:  This  represents  a  further  choice  within 
the  larger  circle  which  had  been  summoned  from  the  general  crowd 
to  a  stated  following  of  him.  The  number  was  doubtless  determined 
because  of  the  representative  position  they  were  to  hold  within  the 
new  Israel  (cf.  Matt.  19  :  28;  Lk.  22  130;  Rev.  21  :  12,  14).  The 
immediate  purpose  of  their  call,  however,  is  given  in  the  following 
statement:  They  were  to  be  in  personal  association  with  him,  and  were 
to  be  sent  forth  by  him  to  herald  the  good  news  (cf.  i  :  15).  Within 
themselves  they  were  to  be  qualified  for  such  a  mission  through  this 
close  companionship  with  him,  and  before  the  people  by  their  author- 
ity to  cast  out  demons  (Matt.  10  :  i  adds  "to  heal  all  manner  of 
disease  and  all  manner  of  sickness"). 

i6-i9a.  Peter  .  .  .  Boanerges:  The  name  actually  given  to  Simon 
was  the  Aramaic  Kepha,  rock  (Jn.  i  :  42),  of  which  *  Peter'  is  the  Greek 
equivalent.    It  does  not  describe  his  personal  characteristics,  which 

67 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

19.  Thaddaeus  and  Simon   the   ^  Cananaean,  and  Judas 
Iscariot,  who  also  ^  betrayed  him. 

1  Zealot  cf.  Lk.  6  :  15;  Acts  i  :  13.  *  delivered  him  up. 

often  showed  themselves  to  be  strikingly  the  opposite  (cf.  8  :  29,  32f.; 
14  :  26-31),  but  rather  his  leadership  among  the  Twelve  (cf.  8  :  29; 
14  :  37;  Matt.  17  :  24),  which  came  into  special  recognition  after  the 
Ascension  (cf.  Acts  i  :  15;  2  :  14;  3  : 1-4,  12;  4  : 8;  5  : 3.  9,  29,  etc.). 
The  Aramaic  name  given  to  the  Sons  of  Zebedee  was  most  likely  one 
which  meant  "sons  of  thunder,"  though  the  etymology  is  uncertain. 
If  so,  it  may  have  been  descriptive  of  the  fiery  zeal  of  these  two 
disciples,  which  showed  itself  in  such  incidents  as  Lk.  9  :  54  and 
Mk.  9  :  38,  or  it  may  have  been  simply  an  application  of  the  folklore 
name  connected  with  the  cult  of  the  Dioscuri,  because  they  were 
twins,  or  so  alike  in  character  and  action  as  appropriately  to  be 
spoken  of  as  such.  Possibly,  both  reasons  may  have  been  more  or  less 
present  (see  Rendel  Harris,  Boanerges,  1913,  Ch.  II).  Like  '  Peter,' 
it  was  not  necessarily  given  at  this  time,  but  unhke  *  Peter  '  (and  the 
later '  Barnabas,'  Acts  4  :  36),  it  apparently  did  not  persist  in  use.  An- 
drew is  separated  from  his  brother  Simon,  in  order  to  allow  the  three 
who  were  specially  intimate  with  Jesus  to  be  named  first  (both  Matt. 
10  :  2  and  Lk.  6  :  14  place  him  next  to  Peter),  but  is  followed  by 
Philip,  who  was  of  his  city,  Bethsaida  (Jn.  i  :  44)  and  is  later  referred 
to  as  in  distinct  companionship  with  him  (jn.  12  :  2 if.,  cf.  also 
6  :  5-9).  Bartholomew  is  probably  identical  with  Nathaniel  of 
Cana  in  Galilee  (Jn.  21:2).  If  so,  he  was  brought  to  Jesus  by  Philip 
(Jn.  I  :  45f .)  whom  he  thus  properly  follows  in  the  list.  Matthew  and 
Thomas  are  associated  in  all  the  synoptic  lists  (Acts  i  :  13  separates 
them  by  Bartholomew) .  Matthew  is  not  referred  to  as  the  other  name 
for  Levi,  possibly  because  it  was  already  his  name  before  coming  into 
the  disciple  circle  (cf.  2  :  14  with  Matt.  9  :  9).  In  Jn.  11  :  16;  20  :  24; 
21:2,  Thomas  is  given  the  surname  Didymus,  twin.  James  the  son 
of  Alphaeus — possibly,  a  brother  of  Matthew  (cf.  2  :  14).  Thad- 
daeus :  Luke  gives  his  name  as  Judas  the  son  of  James,  to  distinguish 
him  from  Judas  Iscariot  (6  :  16;  cf.  also  Acts  i  :  13).  Under  this 
name  he  is  probably  the  one  referred  to  in  Jn.  14  :  22.  The  Ca- 
nanaean— an  Aramaic  word,  not  designating  the  city  to  which  he 
belonged  (Cana),  but  his  personal  character— jea/^jw^  or  zealous  [for 
righteousness]  (cf.  Ex.  20  :  5;  Deut.  4  :  24).  Its  Greek  equivalent 
("the  Zealot")  is  given  by  Luke  (6  :  15).  Judas  Iscariot  (Ut.  the 
man  of  Kerioth) :  The  location  of  this  place  is  uncertain.  If  referred  to 
in  Josh.  15  :  25,  it  was  in  Southeastern  Judah;  if  in  Jer.  48  :  24,  41,  it 
was  in  Moab,  east  of  the  Dead  Sea. 

i9b-2i.  Cometh  into  a  house  (lit.  cometh  home) — marking  his 

68 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

20.  And  he  cometh  into  a  house.  And  the  multi- 
tude  cometh    together   again,    so   that    they   could 

21.  not  so  much  as  eat  bread.  And  when  his  friends 
heard  it,   they  went  out  to  lay  hold  on  him:  for 

22.  they  said,  He  is  beside  himself.  And  the  scribes  that 
came  down  from  Jerusalem  said.  He  hath  Beelzebub, 
and,  ^  By  the  prince  of  the  demons  casteth  he  out  the 

» in  the  prince. 

return  to  Capernaum  after  his  second  preaching  tour,  which  included 
such  incidents  as  the  raising  of  the  widow's  son  (Lk.  7  :  11-17),  the 
anointing  of  Jesus  in  the  house  of  a  Pharisee  (Lk.  7  :  36-50) — possibly 
the  coming  to  him  of  the  embassy  from  the  Baptist  (Lk.  7  :  18-35; 
Matt.  II  :  2-30).  This  return  from  a  successful  tour  would  account 
for  the  renewed  enthusiasm  of  the  populace,  which  expressed  itself 
not  merely  in  a  continuous  demand  on  his  time,  but  in  the  presenta- 
tion to  him  of  a  desperate  case  of  demonic  possession  (Matt.  12  :  22). 
The  selection  of  the  case  by  the  people  suggests  that  much  of  his 
healing  activity  during  this  tour  may  have  been  devoted  to  this 
prevalent  malady.  If  so,  it  may  account  for  the  idea  with  which 
his  friends  (lit.  his  family)  set  out  from  Nazareth  to  lay  hold  on 
him  and  bring  him  home  (cf.  vs.  31-35  for  the  conclusion  of  this  ex- 
pedition), believing  that  he  was  beside  himself.  In  any  case,  their 
effort  was  due  to  their  general  misunderstanding  of  the  spirit  of  his 
ministry. 

(7)  The  Beelzebub  Charge  atid  Jesus'  Answering  Discourse,  3  :  22-30 

22.  He  hath  Beelzebub:  The  reason  for  the  recklessness  of  such  a 
charge  did  not  lie  so  much  in  the  extraordinary  character  of  the  cure 
which  Jesus  had  effected,  as  in  the  threatening  fact  that  it  had  led 
the  people  to  acclaim  him  as  the  Messiah  (Matt.  12  :  23).  The  Scribes 
— especially  those  from  Jerusalem — could  not  help  but  see  that  if 
this  new  teacher,  the  spiritual  claims  of  whose  ministry  were  so  op- 
posed to  their  ceremonial  assumptions  (see  note  on  2  :  6f.)  should  be 
acknowledged  by  the  people  as  Messiah,  their  own  religious  leader- 
ship of  the  people  was  doomed.  To  counteract  the  effect  of  this  cure, 
therefore,  they  claimed  that  it  was  accomplished,  not  by  divine  but 
by  Satanic  power.  The  name  of  the  prince  of  the  demons  should  be 
Beelzebul  (lit.  the  Lord  of  the  Dwelling,  i.e.  the  inhabited  world). 
The  proper  reading  of  this  name  discloses  the  significance  of  the  illus- 
trations with  which  Jesus  confirmed  his  assertion  of  the  impossibility 
of  the  charge:  not  only  the  divided  kingdom,  but  the  divided  house 

69 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

23.  demons.    And  he  called  them  unto  him,  and  said  unto 

24.  them  in  parables,  How  can  Satan  cast  out  Satan?  And 
if  a  kingdom  be  divided  against  itself,  that  kingdom 

25.  cannot  stand.    And  if  a  house  be  divided  against  itself , 

26.  that  house  will  not  be  able  to  stand.  And  if  Satan  hath 
risen  up  against  himself,  and  is  divided,  he  cannot 

27.  stand,  but  hath  an  end.  But  no  one  can  enter  into  the 
house  of  the  strong  man^  and  spoil  his  goods,  except  he 
first  bind  the  strong  man;  and  then  he  will  spoil  his 

28.  house.  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  All  their  sins  shall  be 
forgiven  unto  the  sons  of  men,  and  their  blasphemies 

29.  wherewith  soever  they  shall  blaspheme:  but  whosoever 
shall  blaspheme  against  the  Holy  Spirit  hath  never  for- 

and  the  house  of  the  strong  man.  This  is  brought  out  clearly  in 
Jesus'  address  upon  the  sending  out  of  the  Twelve.  "If  they  have 
called  the  master  of  the  house  Beelzebub  how  much  more  them  of  his 
household"  (Matt.  10  :  25). 

23-27.  How  can  Satan  cast  out  Satan?  The  reference  is  to  moral 
rather  than  to  physical  impossibility  (cf.  Matt.  12  \  2,A\  Lk.  6  142; 
Jn.  5  :  44;  9  :  16).  The  two  illustrations  which  follow  are  coordinate 
and  are  to  be  read,  "As  well  is  it  true  that  if  a  kingdom  be  divided 
against  itself,  it  cannot  stand,  as  also  is  it  true  that  if  a  house  be 
divided  against  itself,  it  cannot  stand,"  the  statement  of  ver.  26  coming 
as  a  conclusion,  "And  so  it  follows  that  if  Satan  hath  risen  up  against 
himself,  and  is  divided,  he  cannot  stand."  This  presentation  of  the 
moral  absurdity  of  the  charge  is  followed  by  an  assertion  of  its  physical 
impossibility  (ver.  27).  The  thought  is  that,  far  from  his  being  in 
league  with  Satan,  on  the  contrary,  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  have 
entered  Satan's  domain  and  spoiled  his  possessions — as  he  had  done 
in  these  miracles — unless  he  had  first,  as  his  enemy,  overcome  him. 
The  reference  here  is  not  to  some  previous  event  in  Jesus'  ministry 
in  which  he  had  overcome  Satan  {e.g.  in  the  Temptation,  for  the 
assaults  of  Satan  continued  after  that  event;  cf.  Matt.  16  :  23),  but 
to  his  innate  mastership  over  the  forces  of  evil  (cf.  i  Jn.  3  :  8). 

28,  29.  This  warning  is  added,  because  Jesus'  desire  was  not  sim- 
ply to  expose  the  logic  involved  in  the  Pharisees'  charge,  but  to  un- 
cover the  personal  attitude  toward  God  involved  in  it.  This  attitude 
he  holds  to  be  unforgivable,  because  it  involves  a  contempt  of  the 

70 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


30.  giveness,  but  is  guilty  of  an  eternal  sin:  because  they 
said,  He  hath  an  unclean  spirit. 

31.  And  there  come  his  mother  and  his  brethren;  and, 
standing  without,  they  sent  unto  him,  calling  him. 

32.  And  a  multitude  was  sitting  about  him;  and  they  say 
unto  him,  Behold,  thy  mother  and  thy  brethren  with- 

33.  out  seek  for  thee.    And  he  answereth  them,  and  saith, 

Holy  Spirit,  as  the  gracious  power  with  which,  as  in  such  rniracles  as 
this  which  had  been  performed,  he  would  draw  men  to  himself  (cf. 
2  Cor.  6  :  i;  Jn.  5  :4o). 

(5)  The  Visit  of  Jesus'  Mother  and  Brethren,  3  :  31-35 
31,  32.  This  incident  not  only  gives  us  the  conclusion  of  the  expedi- 
tion referred  to  in  ver.  21,  but  is  really  a  part  of  the  general  incident 
recorded  in  the  preceding  verses:  since  the  only  intervening  material 
is  the  discourse  of  Jesus  (Matt.  12  :  38-45),  prompted  by  the  hypo- 
critical request  of  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  for  a  genume  sign,  in 
order  further  to  depreciate  the  sign  already  given  in  the  healing  of  the 
Demoniac  and  so  to  offset  its  influence  with  the  people  (cf.  Luke[s 
insertion  of  ver.  16  in  the  narrative  of  the  healing).  The  crowd  is 
still  present,  though  it  is  evident  from  their  close  gathering  around 
Jesus,  as  well  as  from  the  gracious  words  which  he  addressed  to  them 
(ver.  34),  that  it  lacked  the  hostile  element  which  had  been  repre- 
sented by  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees.  Doubtless,  the  judicial  rebuke 
of  Jesus'  discourse  had  caused  this  element  to  withdraw,  and  those 
whom  he  had  called  to  hear  his  answer  to  the  Beelzebul  charge  (ver. 
23)  had  drawn  closer  around  him,  in  full  sympathy  with  him.  If  so, 
we  see  here  the  beginning  of  that  sifting  process  among  the  followers 
of  Jesus  which  increasingly  developed  and  which  was  the  cause  of 
Jesus'  introduction  into  his  teaching,  in  the  next  succeeding  passage, 
of  the  parabolic  form  of  discourse.  (For  other  instances  of  this  change 
in  the  character  of  the  crowd  and  Jesus'  fuller  disclosure  of  truth  to 
the  friendly  element  remaining,  see  7  :  1-17;  9  :  14-28;  12  :  12-37. 
These  make  all  the  more  significant  the  change  in  the  opposite  direc- 
tion during  Passion  Week;  cf.  11  :  18;  12  :  37  with  15  :  8,  11,  i3f-)- 
Calling  him:  The  bluntness  of  this  phrase  suggests  the  suspicion 
which  had  taken  hold  of  his  family  that  he  was  beside  himself  (ver.  21) 
and  had  to  be  abruptly  dealt  with. 

33-35.  Whosoever  shall  do  the  will  of  God  ...  my  brother, 
and  sister,  and  mother:  What  Jesus  means  is  simply  that  the  thing 
which  constitutes  the  closest  relation  to  him  is  obedience  to  the  will 


71 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

34.  Who  is  my  mother  and  my  brethren?  And  looking 
round  on  them  that  sat  round  about  him,  he  saith, 

35.  Behold,  my  mother  and  my  brethren!  For  whosoever 
shall  do  the  will  of  God,  the  same  is  my  brother,  and 
sister,  and  mother. 

4.  And  again  he  began  to  teach  by  the  sea  side.  And 
there  is  gathered  unto  him  a  very  great  multitude,  so 
that  he  entered  into  a  boat,  and  sat  in  the  sea;  and  all 

2.  the  multitude  were  by  the  sea  on  the  land.  And  he 
taught  them  many  things  in  parables,  and  said  unto 

of  God,  for  this  was  the  expression  which  he  himself  gave  to  his  own 
Divine  Sonship  (cf.  Matt.  26  :  39,  42;  Jn.  4  :  34;  5  :  30;  6  :  38).^  This 
doing  of  God's  will  by  his  disciples  will,  consequently,  be  evidence 
that  they  have  a  similar  relation  to  God  and  thus  are  more  closely 
bound  to  himself  than  any  mere  family  ties  could  bind  them  (cf. 
Matt.  7  :  21).  In  saying  this,  he  does  not  annul  all  family  relation- 
ship (cf.  7  :  10-13;  10  :  7-9);  he  only  shows  that  it  is  not  the  control- 
ling relationship  in  life  (cf.  Matt.  8  :  2 if.);  so  that  when  the  spiritual 
and  family  relationships  should  come  into  conflict,  as  he  saw  they 
would,  it  was  the  former  which  should  be  primary  and  the  latter 
secondary  (cf.  Matt.  10  :  34-39;  Lk.  14  :  25!.).  This  effort  on  the 
part  of  his  family  to  get  possession  of  him  and  bring  him  home,  while 
it  was  motived  by  their  desire  to  take  care  of  him  and  protect  him 
from  himself,  was,  in  reality,  such  an  interference  with  the  aim  and 
purpose  of  his  ministry  as  to  compel  him  to  face  the  issue  between 
these  two  relationships  and  maintain  the  former.  This  he  does,  how- 
ever, not  by  denouncing  the  latter,  but  only  by  quietly  ignoring  it. 
The  answer  is  not  given  to  the  family,  even  indirectly,  but  to  the 
sympathetic  crowd. 

(g)  The  Day  of  Parables,  4  : 1-34  (41) 

4:1,  2.  Again  ...  to  teach  by  the  seaside:  This  has  in  mind 
the  former  occasions  of  similar  teaching  narrated  in  2  :  13  and  3  :  7, 
and  most  naturally  locates  this  teaching  at  the  same  place  where 
they  occurred — the  beach  at  Capernaum.  According  to  Matthew, 
it  followed  directly  upon  the  preceding  incident  and  at  Capernaum 
(Matt.  13  :  i).  Luke  inverts  the  order  of  the  incidents,  but  says 
nothing  to  indicate  that  it  did  not  occur  at  Capernaum  (8  :4). 
Taught  them  many  things  in  parables;  This  was  a  new  form  of  dis- 

72 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


3.  them  in  his  teaching,  Hearken:  Behold,  the  sower  went 

4.  forth  to  sow:  and  it  came  to  pass,  as  he  sowed,  some 
seed  fell  by  the  way  side,  and  the  birds  came  and  de- 

5.  voured  it.    And  other  fell  on  the  rocky  ground,  where 
it  had  not  much  earth;  and  straightway  it  sprang 

6.  up,  because  it  had  no  deepness  of  earth:  and  when 
the  sun  was  risen,  it  was  scorched;  and  because  it  had 

7.  no  root,  it  withered  away.    And  other  fell  among 
the  thorns,  and  the  thorns  grew  up,  and  choked  it, 

course,  which  called  attention  to  familiar  processes  in  nature  and 
common  experiences  in  life,  as  illustrative  of  the  spiritual  truths  he 
wished  to  make  plain  to  them  and  bring  to  their  acceptance.  It  was 
a  form  customary  in  the  Rabbinic  Schools,  but  only  with  more  ad- 
vanced scholars.  Jesus  used  it  here  with  the  uneducated  people, 
introducing  it  because  of  the  sifting  process  which  was  taking  place 
in  the  crowds  (see  note  on  3:  31  f-)  and  which  it  was  m tended  to 
accentuate  (see  note  on  vs.  10-12,  following).  This  opening  state- 
ment indicates  that  the  four  parables  which  follow  are  given  merely 
as  representatives  of  the  day's  teaching,  which  is  confirmed  by  the 
larger  number  preserved  in  the  record  of  Matthew,  though  some  of 
these  latter  may  have  been  delivered  on  other  occasions. 

7  A  The  sower— the  particular  one  of  the  parable,  considered  as 
representative  of  the  class  (cf.  Jn.  3  •  10,  where  in  the  same  way 
Nicodemus  is  referred  to  as  "the  teacher  of  Israel  ).  Grain  fields 
may  have  been  visible  back  from  the  shore,  but  the  people  were  fac- 
ing the  sea  and  the  occupation  was  too  familiar  to  need  to  have 
the  process  carried  on  before  the  eye,  in  order  to  make  its  lessons 
plain  By  the  wayside— by  the  side  of  [on  the  edge  of]  the  foot-path 
which  frequently  skirted  and  sometimes  divided  the  grain  fields 
(cf  2  •  2O  Devoured  it:  Being  hard  ground,  the  seed  did  not  fall 
into  the  ground  and  perform  its  proper  function,  but  lay  exposed 
and  was  picked  up  by  the  birds.  ^   u  ^  a  .^rh^r^ 

<  6  Rocky  ground— not  rock  strewn  ground,  but  ground  where 
the 'underlying  rock  was  but  thinly  covered  with  earth.  In  this  thin 
soil  the  seed  received  an  abundance  of  passing  moisture  and  there- 
fore sprang  up  quickly,  but  because  such  soil  was  unable  to  hold 
the  moisture  or  allow  the  seed  to  strike  its  roots  into  deeper  earth 
where  the  moisture  was  retained,  the  growth  as  quickly  withered 
under  the  heat  of  the  sun.  x     .      •  ^    ^1.  a 

7.  Among  the  thorns  (lit.  into  the  thorns)— i.e.  into  the  ground 

73 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

8.  and  it  jdelded  no  fruit.  And  others  fell  into  the  good 
ground,  and  yielded  fruit,  growing  up  and  increasing; 
and  brought  forth,  thirtyfold,  and  sixtyfold,  and  a 

9.  hundredfold.  And  he  said,  Who  hath  ears  to  hear, 
let  him  hear. 

10.      And  when  he  was  alone,  they  that  were  about  him 

which  held  the  seeds  and  roots  of  the  thorns.  Thorns  are  to  the 
Eastern  cultivated  fields  what  weeds  are  to  ours,  and  for  a  part  of  the 
year  constitute  practically  the  only  form  of  vegetation.  Having 
quicker  and  more  luxuriant  growth,  they  would  easily  choke  out  the 
life  of  the  grain. 

8.  Good  ground  (Ht.  good,  as  appearing  to  the  eye) — i.e.  free 
from  the  faults  evident  in  the  other  ground.  Thirty  .  .  .  sixty  .  .  . 
a  hundred  fold — not  extravagant,  when  one  considers  the  fertility 
of  Palestinian  soil,  though  intended  to  express,  in  Oriental  fashion, 
the  large  increase,  rather  than  to  measure  the  actual  yield  (cf.  Gen. 
26  :  2). 

Q.  Let  him  hear — a  challenge,  as  frequently  given  by  Jesus  (cf. 
ver.  23;  Matt.  11  :  15;  13  :  43;  Lk.  14  :  35)  to  consider  carefully  the 
meaning  of  what  had  been  said,  disclosing  the  purpose  with  which 
he  had  chosen  this  form  of  discourse  (see  note  on  vs.  10-12,  following). 

10-12.  The  eflfect  of  the  teaching  was  in  accord  with  its  purpose; 
for  they  that  were  about  him,  as  well  as  the  twelve,  came  to  ask 
of  him  the  lesson  which  he  had  called  upon  them  to  discover.  In  a 
certain  way,  that  lesson  was  obvious;  but  Jesus  was  anxious,  not 
merely  that  they  should  find  it,  but  that  they  should  be  drawn  to 
him  in  its  finding.  This  was  what  happened.  Not  only  the  twelve, 
but  the  sympathetic  portion  of  the  crowd  (Matthew  =  "  the  dis- 
ciples")  found  him  after  the  public  teaching  was  finished  and  asked 
of  him  his  own  interpretation  of  the  parables.  This,  however,  in- 
volved in  a  preliminary  way  making  clear  to  them  why  he  had  spoken 
in  parables  at  all;  for  only  so  would  they  appreciate  his  interpretation 
of  them  and  be  further  encouraged,  when  he  so  taught  again,  to  give 
his  parables  the  attention  they  merited.  (Matthew  transfers  this 
idea  to  the  question  which  they  asked,  13  :  10.)  The  mystery  of  the 
kingdom  of  God — the  kingdom's  secret  truth,  not  in  the  sense  of 
something  unintelligible,  but  of  something  hidden,  in  other  words 
the  revelation  contained  in  Jesus'  message  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
(cf.  Eph.  3  :  3-6;  6  :  19).  This  secret  was  given  to  them,  i.e.  was 
placed  in  their  possession,  through  their  receptivity  to  Jesus'  teach- 
ing. The  understanding  of  this  secret  would  be  aided  by  this  same 
receptivity,  just  as  by  this  receptivity  they  would  be  drawn  to  Jesus 

74 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

11.  with  the  twelve  asked  of  him  the  parables.  And  he 
said  unto  them,  Unto  you  is  given  the  mystery  of  the 
kingdom  of  God:  but  unto  them  that  are  without, 

12.  all  things  are  done  in  parables:  that  seeing  they  may 
see,  and  not  perceive;  and  hearing  they  may  hear, 
and  not  understand;  lest  haply  they  should  turn  again, 

to  satisfy  such  understanding  of  it  as  they  had  (Matthew  thus  carries 
Mark's  statement  into  its  further  development:  "Unto  you  it  is 
given  to  know  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom,"  13  :  11).  Without — 
i.e.  without  this  receptive  circle  (Luke  renders  it  "to  the  rest") 
Done  in  parables:  To  the  unreceptive  portion  of  the  multitude  the 
truth  comes  to  them  in  parables  and  nothing  more.  To  them  the 
parables  are  not  suggestive  of  any  lesson  and  so  they  are  not  drawn 
to  the  Master  for  any  interpretation  of  them.  It  is  in  this  sense  that 
we  are  to  understand  the  motive  with  which  he  made  use  of  the 
parable  form  of  teaching — it  was  primarily  in  order  that  through 
their  spiritual  receptivity  his  sympathetic  followers  might  be  led  to 
deeper  understandings  of  the  truth,  the  result  which  issued  with  the 
unsympathetic  and  unreceptive  multitude  being  involved  in  the 
motive,  but  in  a  secondary  way.  In  both  cases,  the  results  were 
determined  by  the  character  of  those  affected.  In  so  far,  therefore, 
as  the  reason  for  this  method  of  teaching  was  concerned,  while  the 
results  as  well  as  the  causes  were  in  view  by  Jesus,  yet  that  which 
determined  the  introduction  of  the  parables  was  the  attitude  of 
mind  which  the  disciples  on  the  one  hand  and  the  people  on  the  other 
had  already  taken  towards  the  truth  (cf.  Matt.  13  :  13).  That  see- 
ing, they  may  see  and  not  perceive:  In  this  phrase  Mark  places  the 
emphasis  upon  the  secondary  results  which  issued  with  the  un- 
sympathetic multitude,  and  to  the  extent  of  making  them  the  real 
motive  in  the  case.  Evidently,  in  this  statement  Mark  has  been 
influenced  by  the  explanation  given  in  the  early  church  to  the  puzzling 
fact  that  Jesus'  message  and  mission  were  rejected  by  the  people  of 
God  to  whom  they  were  first  directed.  This  church  was  predomi- 
nantly Jewish,  and  it  could  not  understand  how  God's  people  came 
to  do  so  unnatural  a  thing,  unless  it  was  due  to  the  direct  hardening 
of  the  Jewish  heart,  in  order  that  the  plan  God  had  for  His  kingdom's 
progress  into  the  Gentile  world  should  be  carried  out  (cf.  Acts  2  :  23; 
4  :  28;  Rom.  II  :  yf.,  25;  i  Pet.  2  :  8.).  Under  such  convictions  as  to 
the  reason  for  the  Jewish  unbelief,  their  conception  of  the  reason 
Jesus  had  in  using  the  parable  form  of  instruction  would  naturally 
lay  its  emphasis  on  the  results  which  this  form  produced  in  the  hearts 
of  the  Jews  who  were  not  moved  by  them,  rather  than  on  the  cause 

75 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

13.  and  it  should  be  forgiven  them.  And  he  saith  unto 
them,  Know  ye  not  this  parable?  and  how  shall  ye 

14.  know  all  the  parables?    The  sower  soweth  the  word. 

15.  And  these  are  they  by  the  way  side,  where  the  word 
is  sown;  and  when  they  have  heard,  straightway 
Cometh  Satan,  and  taketh  away  the  word  which  hath 

16.  been  sown  in  them.  And  these  m  like  manner  are 
they  that  are  sown  upon  the  rocky  places,  who,  when 
they  have  heard  the  word,   straightway  receive  it 

in  their  unreceptive  hearts  for  its  employment.  And  they  would 
seek  to  explain  these  results,  as  they  did  the  results  of  unbeUef  toward 
Jesus'  religion  on  the  part  of  Judaism  in  general,  as  due  to  the  divine 
hardening  of  their  hearts.  It  was  really  the  only  way,  as  Jews,  they 
saw  how  to  explain  it.  It  was  what  Scripture  told  them  had  hap- 
pened in  Pharaoh's  case;  why  not  in  the  case  of  these  strangely  un- 
moved countrymen  of  theirs?  In  other  words,  we  have  here,  as  in 
the  case  of  the  content  of  the  Baptist's  message  (i  :  4),  a  recasting 
of  the  teaching  as  the  ApostoUc  preaching  viewed  it.  Note  the  phrase 
with  which  Mark  closes  his  statement  ("  lest  haply  they  should  turn 
again  and  it  should  be  forgiven  them,"  ver.  12)  as  reproducing  the 
particularly  Jewish  preaching  of  the  Apostolic  Church  (Acts  8  :  22; 
Jas.  5:i5;ijn.i:9;2:i2;  but  not  by  Paul,  save  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment citation  of  Rom.  4:7). 

13.  Know  ye  not  .  .  .  how  shall  ye  know  all  parables?  Not 
simply  because,  if  they  could  not  understand  this  simple  presentation 
of  the  truth,  they  might  not  expect  to  comprehend  those  that  were 
more  subtle;  but  rather  if  they  did  not  have  that  spiritual  knowledge 
(lit.  knowledge  secured  by  intuition  and  insight)  of  this  parable  that 
would  discover  the  truth  it  was  intended  to  teach,  how  could  they 
expect  to  understand  (lit.  know  through  experience)  the  parables  gen- 
erally as  they  were  made  acquainted  with  them  by  interpretation. 
Their  spiritual  receptivity  to  the  truth  was  that  on  which  rested  all 
their  hope  of  progress  in  the  instruction  he  purposed  for  them  in  these 
parables. 

14-20.  In  his  opening  statement  (ver.  14),  Mark  conceives  of  the 
seed  as  the  word — the  Gospel  message;  but  in  his  following  state- 
ments (vs.  15-20),  the  seed  becomes  those  who,  under  the  varying 
conditions  portrayed  in  the  parable,  hear  the  word.  The  seed  by  the 
beaten  path  represents  those  whose  lack  of  receptivity  makes  it 
impossible  for  the  word  to  enter  into  their  hearts  and  bear  fruit;  the 

76 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


17.  with  joy;  and  they  have  no  root  in  themselves,  but 
endure  for  a  while;  then,  when  tribulation  or  persecu- 
tion ariseth  because  of  the  word,  straightway  they 

iS.  stumble.  And  others  are  they  that  are  sown  among 
the  thorns;  these  are  they  that  have  heard  the  word, 

19.  and  the  cares  of  the  ^  world,  and  the  deceitfulness  of 
riches,  and  the  lusts  of  other  things  entering  in,  choke 

20.  the  word,  and  it  becometh  unfruitful.  And  those 
are  they  that  were  sown  upon  the  good  ground;  such 
as  hear  the  word,  and  accept  it,  and  bear  fruit,  thirty- 
fold,  and  sixtyfold,  and  a  hundredfold. 

21.  And  he  said  unto  them.  Is  the  lamp  brought  to  be 
put  under  the  bushel,  or  under  the  bed,  and  not  to  be 

22.  put  on  the  stand?  For  there  is  nothing  hid,  save 
that  it  should  be  manifested;  neither  was  anything 


the  age. 


seed  in  the  rocky  soil  are  those  who  with  shallow  emotions  receive  the 
word,  but  are  unable  to  withstand  the  pressure  of  unfriendly  and 
hostile  surroundings;  while  the  seed  in  the  thorny  soil  are  those  who 
receive  the  word  into  natures  that  are  not  possessed  of  singleness  of 
purpose  and  therefore  are  open  to  influences  that  ultimately  destroy 
its  growth.  The  seed  which  falls  into  the  good  ground  represents 
those  who,  in  a  sincere  receptivity  to  spiritual  truth  (Luke  renders  it 
"in  an  honest  and  good  heart")  accept  the  message  of  the  word  and 
apply  its  claims  to  their  personal  lives  (Luke  gives  it  "hold  it  fast"). 
With  these  alone  the  word  comes  to  fruitage.  The  parable  as  a  whole 
pictures  thus,  not  so  much  the  difficulties  of  the  Master's  ministry,  as 
the  demand  which  it  made  for  an  appreciation  of  the  solemn  respon- 
sibilities which  rested  upon  those  to  whom  it  came  with  its  word  of 
eternal  life.  There  was  no  lesson  better  suited  to  the  conditions  which 
were  presented  in  the  sifting  process  that  was  taking  place  within  the 

multitude.  ,  .  , ,       r  -u  1 

21,  22.  Following  naturally  upon  this  parable  of  a  responsible 
hearing  of  the  word  is  the  parabolic  saying  as  to  the  responsible 
diffusion  of  its  truth.  This  was  doubtless  spoken,  not  to  the  general 
multitude,  but  to  the  disciples  who  had  come  to  him  for  an  interpreta- 
tion of  the  larger  parable,  and  was  intended  to  further  develop  its 

77 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

23.  made  secret,  but  that  it  should  come  to  light.     If 

24.  any  man  hath  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear.  And  he 
said  unto  them,  Take  heed  what  ye  hear:  with  what 
measure  ye  mete  it  shall  be  measured  unto  you;  and 

25.  more  shall  be  given  unto  you.  For  he  that  hath,  to 
him  shall  be  given;  and  he  that  hath  not,  from  him 
shall  be  taken  away  even  that  which  he  hath. 

26.  And  he  said.  So  is  the  kingdom  of  God,  as  if  a  man 

lesson  of  responsibility.  Lamp — a  small,  shallow  bowl  of  earthen- 
ware, with  its  rim  at  one  point  pinched  inward  to  hold  the  wick,  or 
closed  over  entirely,  excepting  a  small  opening  in  the  centre  from 
which  the  wick  protruded.  Bushel — a  small,  wooden  measure,  hold- 
ing about  a  peck.  Bed  (Ut.  couch) — a  raised  framework  of  wood, 
covered  with  cushions  and  used  by  day  as  a  sofa.  Stand — possibly  of 
earthenware  and  not  over  three  feet  in  height,  on  which  the  lamp  bowl 
was  placed.  Save  that  it  should  be  majalf ested :  The  truth  of  the 
kingdom  had  been  kept  hidden,  but  only  in  order  that,  at  the  proper 
time,  it  should  be  spread  abroad.  That  it  had  been  committed  to 
them,  therefore,  involved  an  obligation  on  their  part  for  its  proclama- 
tion. 

23-25.  The  Master  repeats  to  these  disciples  the  warning  he  had 
given  to  the  general  multitude,  but  in  a  more  significant  way,  because 
of  this  their  more  vital  relation  to  the  truth  which  he  had  spoken  to 
them.  In  proportion  as  they  received  the  truth,  not  only  with  an 
understanding  of  its  meaning,  but  with  a  purpose  to  carry  out  the 
object  with  which  it  was  communicated  to  them,  in  that  proportion 
would  new  truth  be  revealed  to  them.  The  proverbs  with  which  this 
is  enforced  are  used  elsewhere  by  the  Master  with  other  applications, 
the  one  in  ver.  24,  in  Matt.  7  :  2  (Lk.  6  :  38);  the  one  in  ver.  25,  in 
Matt.  25  :  29  (Lk.  19  :  26).  This  admonition  naturally  closes  the 
private  conference  with  the  disciples,  so  that  the  following  two 
parabolic  statements  (vs.  26-34)  may  be  taken  from  the  teaching 
which  was  resumed  in  the  later  part  of  the  day  (see  note  on  vs.  35,  36). 
Luke  gives  the  parable  of  the  Mustard  Seed,  together  with  that  of  the 
Leaven,  as  detached  sayings  in  his  record  of  the  later  Ministry 
(13  :  18-21).  Both  of  them,  however,  belong  more  naturally  here, 
where,  in  fact,  Matthew  places  them. 

26-29.  The  blade — the  green  blade  which  first  shoots  up  from 
the  earth  (cf.  Matt.  13  :  26).  The  ear— into  which  the  blade,  having 
grown  into  a  stalk,  heads  up  (cf.  2  :  23).  The  full  grain  in  the  ear — 
the  ripened  grain  which  finally  develops  in  the  ear.    The  teaching  is 

78 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

27.  should  cast  seed  upon  the  earth;  and  should  sleep 
and  rise  night  and  day,  and  the  seed  should  spring 

28.  up  and  grow,  he  knoweth  not  how.  The  earth  ^  bear- 
eth  fruit  of  herself;  first  the  blade,  then  the  ear,  then 

29.  the  full  grain  in  the  ear.  But  when  the  fruit  ^  is  ripe, 
straightway  he  ^  putteth  forth  the  sickle,  because 
the  harvest  is  come. 

30.  And  he  said,  How  shall  we  liken  the  kingdom  of 

31.  God?  or  in  what  parable  shall  we  set  it  forth?  ^  It  is 
like  a  grain  of  mustard  seed,  which,  when  it  is  sown 
upon  the  earth,  though  it  be  less  than  all  the  seeds 

32.  that  are  upon  the  earth,  yet  when  it  is  sown,  groweth 
up,  and  becometh  greater  than  all  the  herbs,  and 
putteth  out  great  branches;  so  that  the  birds  of  the 
heaven  can  lodge  under  the  shadow  thereof. 

33.  And  with  many  such  parables  spake  he  the  word 

1  yieldeth.         2  alloweth,  or  is  ready.         ^  sendeth  forth.         *  Grk.  as  unto. 

that  the  growth  of  the  kingdom  is  to  be  a  gradual  one,  and  to  be 
carried  on  by  forces  which  are  beyond  external  control  and  which, 
therefore,  do  not  call  for  anxious  care  and  worry.  At  the  end,  how- 
ever, when  the  fruit  is  ripe,  the  coming  of  the  consummation  is  sud- 
den; for  straightway  he  putteth  forth  the  sickle,  because  the  har- 
vest is  come  (see  Hogg,  Christ's  Message  of  the  Kingdom,  p.  37f.)- 

30-32.  A  grain  of  mustard  seed  (lit.  a  seed  grain  of  mustard,  cf. 
I  Cor.  15  :  37;  Jn.  12  :  24),  which  was  commonly  spoken  of  as  the 
smallest  of  seeds  (cf.  Matt.  17  :  20;  Lk.  17  :  6).  The  plant  grows  wild 
and  is  also  cultivated,  reaching  often  to  a  height  of  10  or  12  feet. 
Its  seeds,  which  it  bears  in  profusion,  are  favorite  fruit  for  the  birds, 
who  settle  down  on  its  branches  to  eat  them.  The  persistence  with 
which  this  seed  grows  and  spreads  and  maintains  its  hold  upon  the 
soil,  in  spite  of  constant  weeding  out  makes  this  parable  significantly 
illustrative  of  the  Master's  thought  that  the  growth  of  the  kingdom 
is  one  that  is  not  to  be  measured  by  its  small  beginnings  (see  Exposi- 
tory Tim£S,  Jan.  1913,  p.  187). 

33,  34.  In  these  closing  verses,  which  review  this  new  method  of 
teaching,  the  Evangelist  has,  in  the  former  of  them,  the  disciples 

79 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

34.  unto  them,  as  they  were  able  to  hear  it;  and  without 
a  parable  spake  he  not  unto  them:  but  privately  to 
his  own  disciples  he  expounded  all  things. 

35.  And  on  that  day,  when  even  was  come,  he  saith 

36.  unto  them,  Let  us  go  over  unto  the  other  side.  And 
leaving  the  multitude,  they  take  him  with  them,  even 
as  he  was,  in  the  boat.    And  other  boats  were  with 

37.  him.  And  there  ariseth  a  great  storm  of  wind,  and  the 
waves  beat  into  the  boat,  insomuch  that  the  boat  was 

38.  now  filling.    And  he  himself  was  in  the  stern,  asleep 

specifically  in  view,  to  whose  receptivity  to  the  truth  the  parables 
were  measured  in  their  lesson-conveying  power;  but  in  the  latter  of 
them,  he  has  in  mind  the  general  multitude,  to  the  receptive  portion 
of  whom  the  teaching  of  the  parables  was  privately  unfolded. 

35,  36.  When  even  was  come :  The  incident  is  definitely  connected 
with  the  day  of  parable  teaching,  the  crossing  to  the  other  side  being 
doubtless  (in  fact,  as  Matthew  distinctly  states,  8  :  18,  and  Mark 
intimates,  ver.  36)  to  escape  the  thronging  crowds.  If,  as  is  most 
probable,  all  the  preceding  parables  were  spoken  on  this  same  day, 
it  is  quite  likely  that  the  fresh  hours  of  the  morning  and  the  cool 
hours  of  the  late  afternoon  were  given  to  the  gathering  in  the  open, 
the  explanation  of  the  earlier  parables  being  made  to  the  disciples  in 
the  interim,  when  naturally  the  gathering  would  be  dispersed  for 
rest  during  the  heated  hours  of  the  day  (cf .  Matt.  13  :  36 — the  parable 
of  the  Tares,  belonging  thus  with  that  of  the  Sower  to  the  teaching  of 
the  forenoon) ;  while  it  would  be  almost  certain  that  the  reassemblage 
in  the  afternoon  would  be  much  more  largely  attended  than  the  one 
in  the  morning — the  new  teaching  drawing  greater  crowds  as  it 
became  known.  Other  boats — occupied  possibly  by  the  specially 
curious  portion  of  the  crowd  which  was  not  content  to  stand  upon 
the  beach  and  listen  to  the  Master  speaking  from  the  boat,  but 
crowded  closer  to  him  on  the  water  while  he  spoke,  and,  when  he  left 
in  his  boat,  persisted  in  following  him.  If  so,  they  were  dispersed  by 
the  storm. 

37.  A  great  storm  of  wind  (lit.  a  great  Inirricane  of  whid) — one  of 
those  cyclonic  wind  storms  which  were  accustomed  suddenly  to 
sweep  down  from  the  mountain  gorges  that  lined  the  West  shores  of 
the  lake,  and  whip  its  waters  into  fury.  Matthew  speaks  of  it,  from 
its  effect  upon  the  water,  as  an  earthquake  (Matt.  8  :  24). 

38.  The  cushion  (lit.  the  headrest) — the  low  bench  at  the  stem, 

80 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

on  the  cushion:  and  they  awake  him,  and  say  unto 

39.  him,  Teacher,  carest  thou  not  that  we  perish?  And 
he  awoke,  and  rebuked  the  wind,  and  said  unto  the 
sea,  Peace,  be  still.    And  the  wind  ceased,  and  there 

40.  was  a  great  calm.    And  he  said  unto  them.  Why  are 

on  which  the  steersman  might  sit,  or  the  captain  might  rest  his  head  to 
sleep.  As  these  Galilean  boats  were  small  and  accommodated  at  the 
most  but  a  few  persons  (cf.  i  :  20),  it  is  clear  that  Jesus'  occupancy  of 
this  place  not  only  made  it  necessary  for  the  steersman  to  stand,  but 
that  the  entire  Twelve  could  not  have  accompanied  him  on  this 
occasion.  Probably,  this  was  again  Peter's  boat  (cf.  Lk.  5  :  3)  and 
the  only  ones  with  him  in  it  were  the  three  disciples  who  were  now,  in 
this  very  process  of  sympathetic  sifting  among  his  followers,  coming 
into  closer  relations  to  him. 

39.  Rebuked  ...  be  still  (lit.  be  muzzled,  cf.  i  Cor.  9:9): 
Though  these  are  the  same  words  used  for  Jesus'  command  to  evil 
spirits  (i  :  25),  and  though  he  rebuked  diseases  which  were  popularly 
supposed  to  be  due  to  possession  (Lk.  4  :  39),  there  is  no  reason  to 
believe  that  they  are  intended  to  convey  the  idea  that  Jesus  believed 
in  the  demonic  possession  of  the  Lake.  He  rebuked  individuals, 
where  there  was  no  idea  of  possession  (8  :  32f.;  10  :  13,  48).  It  is 
simply  a  part  of  the  graphic  description  of  Oriental  imagery.  Note 
the  following  phrase:  and  the  wind  ceased  (lit.  sank  ivearied  to  rest), 
and  the  use  by  Jesus  elsewhere  of  personification  of  animate  and 
inanimate  nature  in  address  (11  :  14,  23). 

40,  41.  Have  ye  not  yet  faith?  What  Jesus  expected  of  the  disci- 
ples was  not  so  much  a  confidence  in  God's  power  over  the  storm — ■ 
which  they  might  have  had  as  Jews — and  his  exercise  of  this  power 
in  their  behalf,  as  their  Heavenly  Father — which  they  might  have  had 
through  Jesus'  new  revelation  to  them  of  God — but  a  confidence  in 
God's  possession  and  exercise  of  this  power,  through  his  own  presence 
with  them  in  the  boat.  They  evidently  did  not  lack  reliance  in  his 
ability  to  secure  God's  power  to  save  them  from  the  storm,  for  it  was 
this  that  led  them  to  wake  him;  but  they  lacked  an  appreciation  of 
that  power  as  resident  in  himself.  Their  awe,  when  they  saw  him 
quell  the  waves,  shows  that  what  they  expected  him  to  do  when  they 
waked  him  was  in  some  way  to  enlist  God's  power  against  the  storm 
in  their  behalf.  Their  experience  of  his  personal  power  so  far  had 
been  confined  to  casting  out  demons  and  curing  diseases,  though 
his  power  to  cure  had  not  stopped  short  of  restoring  life  to  the  dead 
(Lk.  7  :  11-17).  This  was  the  first  time  they  had  seen  him  face  to 
face  with  the  relentless  forces  of  nature,  and  if  they  thought  the  sea 

81 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

41.  ye  fearful?  have  ye  not  yet  faith?    And  they  feared 
exceedingly,  and  said  one  to  another,  Who  then  is 
this,  that  even  the  wind  and  the  sea  obey  him? 
6.      And  they  came  to  the  other  side  of  the  sea,  into  the 

2.  country  of  the  Gerasenes.    And  when  he  was  come  out 
of  the  boat,  straightway  there  met  him  out  of  the  tombs 

3.  a  man  with  an  imclean  spirit,  who  had  his  dwelling 
in  the  tombs:  and  no  man  could  any  more  bind  him, 

demonized,  it  was  to  them  at  least  a  more  fearful  demon  than  any 
that  possessed  the  body.  Consequently,  when  the  storm  subsided, 
they  were  filled  with  awesome  dread,  because  even  the  wind  and  the 
sea  obey  him.  It  was  a  faith  in  God  he  expected  in  them,  but  a  faith 
in  God  through  faith  in  himself.  He  did  not  wish  to  replace  their 
faith  in  God  with  a  faith  in  himself,  but  to  bring  their  faith  in  God  to 
a  completeness  through  their  faith  in  himself  as  related  to  God;  for 
the  faith  to  which  he  had  finally  to  bring  them  and  to  which  he  was 
directing  all  his  ministry  with  them  was  a  faith  in  God's  Saviorship 
as  possible  only  through  himself.  This  made  indispensable  a  faith 
in  himself  as  the  Executor  of  that  Salvation,  and  gives  the  reason  why 
he  made  the  purpose  of  his  ministry,  not  so  much  the  impression  of 
his  disciples  from  his  miraculous  power — though  this  was  necessary  if 
they  were  to  appreciate  who  he  was — nor  even  their  impression  from 
his  teaching — though  this  was  necessary  if  they  were  to  realize  what 
he  was  to  do — but  the  impression  of  them  with  himself;  for  this  was 
essential  if  his  disciples  were  to  understand  that  it  was  their  relation 
to  him  himself  that  determined  their  Salvation. 

(10)  The  Gerasene  Demoniac,  5  ;  1-20  {21) 

5:1.  Gerasenes:  The  scene  of  this  incident  is  to  be  identified  with 
a  town  directly  opposite  Magdala,  the  ruined  site  of  which  is  known  as 
Gersa,  or  Kersa.  The  topographical  conditions  of  this  locality  satisfy 
the  requirements  of  the  narrative.  This  town  may  have  been  in- 
cluded popularly  in  the  larger  territory  of  Gadara, — the  principal 
city  of  that  region.  Such  an  hypothesis  would  account  for  the 
name  in  Matthew's  record  (8  :  2^). 

2-5.  Tombs:  There  are  numerous  caves  in  the  limestone  hills  of 
the  Eastern  shore,  which  might  be  used  for  burial  and  to  which  the 
demonized  man  would  naturally  resort,  under  the  preconceived  idea 
that  such  places,  unclean  in  themselves,  were  the  haunts  of  unclean 
spirits.    Bind  him  .  .  .  tame  him :  It  was  evidently  an  exceedingly 

82 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

4.  no,  not  with  a  chain;  because  that  he  had  been  often 
bound  with  fetters  and  chains,  and  the  chains  had 
been  rent  asunder  by  him,  and  the  fetters  broken  in 

5.  pieces:  and  no  man  had  strength  to  tame  him.  And 
always,  night  and  day,  in  the  tombs  and  in  the  moun- 
tains, he  was  crying  out,  and  cutting  himself  with 

6.  stones.     And  when  he  saw  Jesus  from  afar,  he  ran 

7.  and  worshipped  him;  and  crying  out  with  a  loud 
voice,  he  saith.  What  have  I  to  do  with  thee,  Jesus, 
thou  Son  of  the  Most  High  God?    I  adjure  thee  by 

8.  God,  torment  me  not.    For  he  said  unto  him.  Come 

9.  forth,  thou  unclean  spirit,  out  of  the  man.  And  he 
asked  him.  What  is  thy  name?    And  he  saith  unto 

violent  case,  which  the  people  had  attempted  to  control  for  their  own 
safety  (cf.  Matt.  8  :  28),  but  with  no  other  result  than  an  increase  of 
its  violence,  even  to  the  extent  of  self-injury.  Rent  asunder  (lit. 
torn  to  shreds,  cf.  Acts  23  :  10).     Broken  in  pieces  (lit.  crushed,  cf. 

14  :  3)- 

6-8.  Worshipped  him:  Here,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Capernaum  de- 
moniac (i  :  23-26),  it  was  the  expression  of  hostility  and  fear,  and 
not  a  conscious  moral  or  ceremonial  diflference  from  Jesus.  His  first 
approach  toward  the  boat  load  of  people  was  doubtless  due  to  the 
general  enmity  against  his  fellow  men  with  which  he  was  possessed; 
but  his  instinctive  recognition  of  Jesus  changed  this  into  a  personal 
hostiUty,  overmastered  by  a  dread  which  was  not  wholly  due  to 
Jesus'  command  to  come  out  of  the  man,  as  is  clear  from  the  parallel 
case  in  Capernaum,  where  the  dread  was  expressed  before  the  com- 
mand was  given  (i  :  23!.).  Evidently,  we  have  in  both  cases  a  pro- 
found impression  of  Jesus'  personality  upon  the  personality  which 
controlled  the  man.  Torment  me  not— apparently,  the  agony  which 
accompanied  an  absolute  expulsion  (cf.  i  :  26;  9  :  26),  to  which  ex- 
pulsion Mark  seemingly  refers  in  ver.  10  and  Luke  in  his  parallel 
passage  (8  131),  and  which  was  avoided  by  the  permission  finally 
granted  to  enter  into  the  swine  (vs.  i2f.). 

9,  10.  Thy  name — addressed,  not  to  the  man,  but  to  the  demon. 
This  is  in  accord  with  exorcistic  practice  from  earliest  times,  the 
idea  being  that  by  the  demon's  disclosing  his  identity  it  becomes 
possible  to  cast  him  out. 

83 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

10.  him,  My  name  is  Legion;  for  we  are  many.  And  he 
besought  him  much  that  he  would  not  send  them  away 

11.  out  of  the  country.    Now  there  was  there  on  the  moun- 

12.  tain  side  a  great  herd  of  swine  feeding.  And  they  be- 
sought him,  saying,  Send  us  into  the  swine,  that  we 

13.  may  enter  into  them.  And  he  gave  them  leave.  And 
the  imclean  spirits  came  out,  and  entered  into  the 
swine:  and  the  herd  rushed  down  the  steep  into  the 
sea,  in  number  about  two  thousand;  and  they  were 

14.  drowned  in  the  sea.  And  they  that  fed  them  fled,  and 
told  it  in  the  city,  and  in  the  country.    And  they  came 

15.  to  see  what  it  was  that  had  come  to  pass.  And  they 
come  to  Jesus,  and  behold  ^  him  that  was  possessed 
with  demons  sitting,  clothed  and  in  his  right  mind,  even 

1  the  demoniac. 

11-13.  There  are  two  questions  naturally  raised  by  this  incident: 
(a)  The  psychological  one,  as  to  whether  animals  are  subjects  of 
demoniacal  possession,  and  (b)  the  moral  one,  as  to  whether  the 
destruction  of  property  in  this  case  was  justifiable.  As  to  (a),  we 
know  too  little  about  the  influences  of  personality  upon  animal  intelli- 
gence to  deny  the  possibility  of  such  an  occurrence  as  is  here  nar- 
rated; while  as  to  (b),  there  are  too  many  things  to  be  considered 
in  the  incident  to  permit  of  a  dogmatic  judgment  against  the  justi- 
fiable character  of  the  act.  Its  rightness  cannot  be  denied  without 
assuring  ourselves  that  Jesus  necessarily  knew  beforehand  the  fatal 
effect  which  possession  of  the  swine  would  involve;  or  that  this  per- 
mission of  animal  possession  was  purely  arbitrary  on  his  part  and 
not  in  line  with  his  effort  to  bring  about  an  expulsion  of  the  demons 
which  would  be  without  torture  and  so  most  merciful  to  the  man. 
In  any  case — whatever  may  have  been  the  Master's  knowledge  of  the 
results  and  his  purpose  in  the  action — the  freedom  which  the  com- 
munity secured  from  the  ever  present  danger  of  this  violent  maniac 
more  than  measured  up  to  the  loss  of  the  swine,  for  with  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  animals  the  demons  had  no  further  abiding  place  in  the 
region. 

14-17.  Were  afraid:  The  keepers  of  the  herd  naturally  made  haste 
to  tell  the  owners  what  had  happened,  and  they,  as  naturally,  hur- 

84 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

i6.  him  that  had  the  legion:  and  they  were  afraid.  And 
they  that  saw  it  declared  unto  them  how  it  befell  ^  him 
that  was  possessed  with  demons,  and  concerning  the 

17.  swine.    And  they  began  to  beseech  him  to  depart  from 

18.  their  borders.  And  as  he  was  entering  into  the  boat, 
^  he  that  had  been  possessed  with  demons  besought  him 

19.  that  he  might  be  with  him.  And  he  suffered  him  not, 
but  saith  unto  him,  Go  to  thy  house  unto  thy  friends, 
and  tell  them  how  great  things  the  Lord  hath  done 

20.  for  thee,  and  how  he  had  mercy  on  thee.     And  he 

1  the  demoniac. 

riedly  made  their  way  to  the  scene  of  the  occurrence.  The  change 
which  they  saw  in  the  maniac  produced  in  them  the  consciousness  of 
an  unearthly  power  in  their  midst.  But  when,  from  those  who  had 
witnessed  all  that  had  happened,  they  learned  of  the  vital  connection 
between  the  cure  of  the  maniac  and  the  destruction  of  the  demonized 
swine,  their  fear  impelled  them  to  beseech  Jesus  to  leave  their  coun- 
try, lest  his  strange  and  uncalculable  power  should  bring  further 
losses  upon  them. 

18-20.  Suffered  him  not:  The  request  of  the  healed  man  may  have 
had  behind  it  a  fear  lest  the  demons  return  to  him,  if  he  remained  in 
the  country  (Matt.  12  :  43-45);  it  certainly  had  within  it  a  gratitude 
for  the  deliverance  from  them  which  Jesus  had  wrought.  It  is, 
consequently,  a  request  which  commends  itself  as  most  natural.  The 
refusal  of  it,  however,  with  the  following  command  to  publish  his 
cure  raises  the  question  why  Jesus  should  have  pursued  a  course 
here  directly  contrary  to  that  which  he  pursued  on  the  other  side  of 
the  Lake.  The  only  answer  is  that  the  conditions  were  wholly  dif- 
ferent. The  inhabitants  of  this  region  were  not  Jews,  nervously 
ready  for  a  political  revolution  in  the  following  of  a  sensationally 
proclaimed  Messiah;  nor  were  his  disciples  and  himself  to  be  allowed 
to  remain  among  them  for  any  teaching  or  service.  The  ministry 
of  this  cured  man  could  do  no  harm,  therefore,  among  the  people  to 
whom  it  was  to  go;  while,  without  it,  there  could  be  no  proclamation 
among  them  of  the  good  news  of  the  kingdom,  even  of  this  crude  and 
immature  kind.  Decapolis  (lit.  The  Ten  Cities) — a  large  and  unde- 
fined region  lying  generally  to  the  West,  East  and  South  of  Gersa, 
including  the  territory  of  Gadara,  in  which  Gersa  itself  probably  be- 
longed.   The  man  compassed  a  much  larger  region  than  Jesus  pro- 

85 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

went  his  way,  and  began  to  publish  in  Decapolis 
how  great  things  Jesus  had  done  for  him:  and  all 
men  marvelled. 

21.  And  when  Jesus  had  crossed  over  again  in  the  boat 
unto  the  other  side,  a  great  multitude  was  gathered 

22.  unto  him;  and  he  was  by  the  sea.  And  there  cometh 
one  of  the  rulers  of  the  synagogue,  Jairus  by  name; 

23.  and  seeing  him,  he  falleth  at  his  feet,  and  beseecheth 
him  much,  saying.  My  little  daughter  is  at  the  point 
of  death:  /  pray  thee,  that  thou  come  and  lay  thy 
hands  on  her,  that  she  may  be  ^  made  whole,  and  live. 

24.  And  he  went  with  him;  and  a  great  multitude  followed 
him,  and  they  thronged  him. 

1  he  saved,  or  recover. 

posed  to  him,  and  the  enthusiasm  with  which  the  Master  was  re- 
ceived when,  later  on,  he  came  into  this  country  (7  :  1-8  :  9)  may  not 
have  been  uninfluenced  by  the  story  which  he  published,  and  at 
which  the  people  marvelled. 

(77)  Jairus^  Daughter  and  the  Woman  by  the  Way,  5  ;  21-4J  (6  :  i) 

21.  From  ver.  18  it  would  seem  that  the  return  to  Capernaum 
was  made  immediately  upon  the  close  of  the  preceding  incident, 
while  from  ver.  2  it  would  be  equally  clear  that  the  incident  occurred 
immediately  upon  their  arrival  from  the  other  side.  This,  however, 
does  not  necessitate  the  incident  having  occurred  on  the  same  day 
as  that  of  the  parables. 

22,  24.  Rulers  of  the  Synagogue — administrative  officers  who 
superintended  the  worship  of  the  Synagogue.  In  the  larger  syna- 
gogues there  might  be  more  than  one  such  officer  (cf.  Acts  13  :  15 
and  Schurer,  II  :  ii,  6si.).  At  the  point  of  death:  The  Ruler  clearly 
recognized  the  serious  condition  of  his  daughter.  He  wished  Jesus  to 
cure  her,  and  laid  aside  all  official  dignity  in  order  to  make  strong  his 
appeal.  To  this  extent,  he  believed  in  Jesus'  power  in  himself,  or 
with  God;  but  beyond  this  he  apparently  did  not  go,  since,  when 
news  of  her  death  was  brought  him,  he,  equally  with  the  messengers, 
considered  it  useless  further  to  trouble  the  Master.  The  response 
which  he  made  to  Jesus'  appeal  that  he  should  not  fear,  but  simply 

86 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


25.  And  a  woman,  who  had  an  issue  of  blood  twelve 

26.  years,  and  had  suffered  many  things  of  many  physi- 
cians, and  had  spent  all  that  she  had,  and  was  nothing 

27.  bettered,  but  rather  grew  worse,  having  heard  the 
things  concerning  Jesus,  came  in  the  crowd  behind, 

28.  and  touched  his  garment.     For  she  said,  If  I  touch 

29.  but  his  garments,  I  shall  be  ^  made  whole.  And 
straightway  the  fountain  of  her  blood  was  dried  up; 
and  she  felt  in  her  body  that  she  was  healed  of  her 

30.  ^  plague.    And  straightway  Jesus,  perceiving  in  himself 

1  be  saved,  or  recover.  2  Grk.  scourge. 

believe,  must  have  been,  at  best,  merely  a  silent  willingness  to  let 
Jesus  attempt  what  he  could  in  the  case.  The  daughter  whom  he 
believed  Jesus  could  cure  was  dead,  and  the  courage  of  hope  to 
which  that  faith  had  given  rise  was  replaced  by  the  fear  that  goes 
with  hopelessness — i.e.  that  fear  which,  like  a  panic,  follows  the 
conviction  that  certain  wished  for  results  can  never  be  secured. 

25-29.  Touched  his  garment:  It  is  quite  clear  that  the  reason 
for  her  secret  approach  to  the  Master  was,  not  only  her  womanly 
sensitiveness,  but  the  fact  that  her  disease  rendered  her  ceremonially 
unclean  (Lev.  15  :  19-27).  It  is  equally  clear  that  the  reason  why 
she  was  content  to  touch  the  garment  of  Jesus  for  her  cure  was  be- 
cause of  a  superstitious  element  in  her  faith.  (Note  the  same  popular 
idea  in  the  crowds  earlier  in  his  ministry,  3  :  10,  and  later,  6  :  56), 
though  it  was  not  this  but  the  personal  element  in  her  faith,  that 
related  herself  as  a  sufiferer  to  Jesus  as  a  healer  that  effected  the  cure. 
•  30-32.  Power  .  .  .  had  gone  forth:  Mark  does  not  give  this  as  a 
statement  of  Jesus  himself— as  does  Luke  in  his  later  and  perhaps 
more  idealized  understanding  of  the  case  (8  :  46).  It  may,  there- 
fore, have  been  but  the  natural  inference  of  the  disciples  that  this 
was  how  the  healing— to  all  appearances  without  Jesus'  personal  act- 
was  to  be  explained ;  whereas,  in  fact,  Jesus  had  not  only  been  con- 
scious of  a  touch,  different  from  the  careless  contacts  of  a  pressing 
crowd,  but  had  personally  responded  to  it.  (See  Garvie,  Studies  in 
the  Inner  Life  of  Jesus,  p.  231;  Hogg,  Christ's  Message  of  the  Kingdom, 
pp.  64-66.) 

33,  34.  Fearing  and  trembling:  She  may  have  feared  a  rebuke  from 
him,  because  by  her  touch  she  had  rendered  him  ceremonially  un- 
clean (Lev.  15  :  19),  while  she  knew  also  that  she  had  got  her  cure 

87 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

that  the  power  proceeding  from  him  had  gone  forth, 
turned  him  about  in  the  crowd,  and  said,  Who  touched 

31.  my  garments?  And  his  disciples  said  unto  him.  Thou 
seest  the  multitude  thronging  thee,  and  sayest  thou, 

32.  Who  touched  me?     And  he  looked  round  about  to 

33.  see  her  that  had  done  this  thing.  But  the  woman 
fearing  and  trembling,  knowing  what  had  been  done 
to  her,  came  and  fell  down  before  him,  and  told  him 

34.  all  the  truth.  And  he  said  unto  her,  Daughter,  thy 
faith  hath  ^  made  thee  whole;  go  in  peace,  and  be 
whole  of  thy  ^  plague. 

35.  While  he  yet  spake,  they  come  from  the  ruler  of  the 
synagogue's   house,   saying.   Thy   daughter   is   dead: 

36.  why  troublest  thou  the  Teacher  any  further?  But 
Jesus,   ^  not  heeding   the   word   spoken,   saith   unto 

^  saved  thee.  ^Gik.,  scourge.  ^overhearing. 

by  stealth.  More  likely,  however,  this  was  the  outcome  of  the  men- 
tal and  spiritual  effort  that  had  been  necessary  to  bring  her  to  the 
act,  and  of  the  consciousness  of  the  great  cure  that  had  been  wrought 
within  her.  The  incident  of  vs.  30-33  is  not  given  by  Matthew. 
Thy  faith  .  .  .  whole:  While  Jesus  had  responded  to  her  act,  as 
far  as  it  had  been  one  of  faith,  he  had  not  been  wilHng  to  leave  the 
faith  in  its  crude  condition,  and  so  had  summoned  her  to  a  confession, 
in  order  that  the  personal  element  in  her  faith  might  be  brought  to 
its  expression  and  thus  confirmed  and  made  strong.  It  is  only  after 
her  personal  confession  that  her  faith  is  commended  by  him. 

35,  36.  Fear  not,  only  believe:  Jesus'  demand  upon  the  Ruler 
was,  negatively,  to  lay  aside  the  panic  of  his  fear,  which,  of  course, 
would  be  possible  only  as  the  positive  element  of  a  stronger  faith 
was  realized,  since  this  was  the  basis  on  which  alone  he  could  act. 
The  Ruler's  faith  had  not  considered  Jesus  practically  as  one  who 
could  do  more  than  cure.  The  situation,  however,  was  now  beyond 
this  point,  and  the  faith  which  Jesus  asked  for  was  one  which  should 
be  equal  to  the  emergency  of  death,  on  the  basis  of  a  personal  confi- 
dence in  him  as  having  and  exercising  a  power  beyond  that  even  of  a 
superior  exorcism.     (Note  the  popular  acclaim  of  Jesus  after  the 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

37.  the  ruler  of  the  synagogue,  Fear  not,  only  believe.  And 
he  suffered  no  man  to  follow  with  him,  save  Peter, 

38.  and  ^  James,  and  John  the  brother  of  ^  James.  And 
they  come  to  the  house  of  the  ruler  of  the  synagogue; 
and  he  beholdeth  a  tumult,  and  mayiy  weeping  and 

39.  wailing  greatly.  And  when  he  was  entered  in,  he  saith 
unto  them.  Why  make  ye  a  tumult,  and  weep?  the 

40.  child  is  not  dead,  but  sleepeth.  And  they  laughed 
him  to  scorn.  But  he,  having  put  them  all  forth, 
taketh  the  father  of  the  child  and  her  mother  and  them 
that  were  with  him,  and  goeth  in  where  the  child  was. 

1  Jacob. 

raising  of  the  Widow's  Son,  Lk.  7  :  i6).    This  incident  of  the  message 
and  Jesus'  demand  for  a  stronger  faith  is  not  given  by  Matthew. 

37-40.  Save  Peter,  and  James  and  John:  This  is  the  first  men- 
tion of  Jesus'  selection  of  members  of  the  Twelve  to  be  companions 
with  him  in  his  special  experiences.  (This  selection  is  not  referred 
to  by  Matthew.)  These  three  were  with  him  later  at  the  Transfigura- 
tion (9  :  2)  and  in  Gethsemane  (14  :2)2>)-  A  tumult — the  uproar 
made  by  the  professional  mourners  and  flute  players  (cf.  Matt.  9  :  23), 
who  were  doubtless  stationed  in  the  court,  through  which  Jesus  passed 
on  his  way  to  the  room.  Why  .  .  .  tumult  and  weep?  This  re- 
monstrance doubtless  met  with  no  response  and  was  consequently 
followed  by  the  command  to  leave  the  place  (cf.  Matt.  9  :  24),  with 
the  statement  of  the  fact  on  which  the  command  was  based — the 
child  is  not  dead  but  sleepeth:  This  is  a  metaphorical  statement, 
similar  to  the  one  made  in  the  case  of  Lazarus  (Jn.  11  :  11-14),  and 
based  upon  the  common  Jewish  usage  of  sleep  as  a  figure  of  death 
(cf.  Matt.  27  :  52;  Acts  7  :  60;  13  :  36;  i  Cor.  15  :  20,  etc.,  and  fre- 
quently in  the  Old  Testament).  Jesus  recognized  the  fact  that  the 
child  was  dead,  but  proclaimed  by  these  words  his  consciousness  of 
power  and  his  purpose  to  restore  her  to  life.  To  suppose  that  he 
believed  the  child  was  dead  when  she  was  not,  is  to  beg  the  question 
of  his  power  to  raise  the  dead;  to  suppose  that  he  knew  she  was  not 
dead,  is  to  credit  him  with  unusual  powers  of  diagnosis  before  he  had 
seen  the  body.  Either  supposition  is  improbable.  Laughed  him 
to  scorn:  Their  boisterous  resentment  of  Jesus'  statement — a  resent- 
ment not  unnatural  in  view  of  their  spiritual  inability  to  recognize  the 

89 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

41.  And  taking  the  child  by  the  hand,  he  saith  unto  her, 
Talitha  cumi;  which  is,  being  interpreted.  Damsel,  I 

42.  say  unto  thee.  Arise.  And  straightway  the  damsel 
rose  up,  and  walked;  for  she  was  twelve  years  old. 
And   they  were   amazed   straightway  with   a  great 

43.  amazement.  And  he  charged  them  much  that  no 
man  should  know  this:  and  he  commanded  that  some- 
thing should  be  given  her  to  eat. 

6.  And  he  went  out  from  thence;  and  he  cometh  into 

meaning  it  contained — made  necessary  their  removal  from  the  prem- 
ises. 

41-43.  Arise:  This  summons  (not  given  by  Matthew,  9  :  25)  is 
identical  with  that  made  to  the  Widow's  Son  at  Nain  {tk.  7  :  14), 
and  practically  the  same  as  that  to  Lazarus  in  the  tomb  (Jn.  11  :  43). 
It  is  not  a  summons  to  the  body  to  awake  (4  :  38),  but  to  the  soul 
to  resume  its  Hvdng  functions  in  the  body  (Lk.  8  :  55).  Charged  .  .  . 
no  man  should  know  this:  Apparently,  this  caution  (not  referred 
to  by  Matthew)  was  due  to  the  fact  that  conditions  were  develop- 
ing, which,  if  sensationally  intensified,  would  end  all  his  Galilean 
work.  Two  preaching  tours  had  been  made,  on  the  latter  of  which 
he  had  been  hailed  as  the  Messiah  (Matt.  12  :  23),  the  sifting  process 
was  giving  more  force  to  the  increasing  enthusiasm  of  the  sympathetic 
element  among  the  people,  and  this  enthusiasm  might  easily  be  led 
astray  from  the  spiritual  goal  to  which  he  wished  to  bring  it  to  a 
purely  political  outcome,  as  in  fact  it  was,  soon  after  this  (Jn.  6  :  i4f.). 
The  taking  with  him  of  none  but  the  parents  and  the  chosen  disciples, 
and  the  dismissal  of  the  mourners,  shows  his  desire  to  reduce  the  sen- 
sation caused  by  the  miracle  to  its  minimum.  No  such  action  or 
command  was  considered  needful,  either  in  the  earlier  case  at  Nain, 
or  at  the  later  case  at  Bethany;  but  his  statement  that  the  maid  was 
not  dead,  but  only  asleep,  cannot  be  assigned  to  this  motive  without 
attacking  the  moral  position  of  Jesus.  It  was  not  intended  as  a  cue 
to  the  report  he  wished  them  to  spread  abroad,  but  as  a  rebuke  to 
the  popular  lack  of  faith  in  him  for  such  an  emergency  as  presented 
itself  in  the  death  of  this  child. 

{12)  The  Rejection  at  Nazareth,  6  :  i-6a 

6:1.  This  incident  is  recorded  by  Luke  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Galilean  ministry  (4  :  16-30).  It  is  given  with  considerable  detail 
and,  probably,  from  sources  peculiar  to  himself.    Matthew  records  it 

90 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

2.  his  own  country;  and  his  disciples  follow  him.  And 
when  the  sabbath  was  come,  he  began  to  teach  in 
the  synagogue:  and  ^  many  hearing  him  were  aston- 
ished, saying,  Whence  hath  this  man  these  things? 
and,  What  is  the  wisdom  that  is  given  unto  this  man, 
and  what  mean  such  ^  mighty  works  wrought  by  his 

3.  hands?    Is  not  this  the  carpenter,  the  son  of  Mary, 

1  Some  MSS.  prefix  tlie.  2  Grk.  powers. 

at  the  close  of  the  day  of  Parables  (13  :  54-58).  Mark's  placing  of  it 
is  most  likely  to  be  historical;  for,  as  he  presents  it,  it  seems  another 
attempt  on  Jesus'  part  to  escape  the  increasing  crowds.  At  the  same 
time,  we  must  not  deny  the  possibility  of  Jesus'  having  visited  his 
home  town  early  in  his  Galilean  work,  though  it  could  not  have 
been  with  the  violent  results  which  Luke  gives  us  in  his  record. 
These  belong  to  the  advanced  stage  of  his  ministry,  when  hostility 
was  rising  against  him  (see  note  on  3  :  6).  His  own  country:  This 
word  here  and  in  ver.  4  (Matt.  13  :  54;  Lk._4  :  23f.)  has  its  narrower 
meaning  of  'town,'  since  Jesus  was  already  in  Galilee;  in  Jn.  4  :  44,  it 
has  its  more  usual  meaning  of  'country,'  since  Jesus  was  going  from 
Judsea  into  Galilee.  Neither  Matthew  nor  Luke  make  mention  of 
his  being  accompanied  by  his  disciples. 

2,  3.  He  began  to  teach  in  the  synagogue:  Jesus'  'custom,'  to 
which  Luke  refers  (4  :  16),  was  his  custom  in  the  earlier  years  in 
Nazareth  of  worshipping  in  the  home  synagogue;  his  teaching,  either 
in  this  or  in  other  synagogues,  was  only  through  invitation  of  the 
officials.  Many  .  .  .  were  astonished:  Jesus'  discourse,  which  was 
based  on  what  was  apparently  the  lesson  for  the  day  as  given  in 
Isa.  61  :  if.  (Lk.  4  :  18),  produced  on  the  greater  portion  of  his 
audience  an  unfortunate  impression.  They  admitted  its  wisdom, 
they  recognized  also  the  significance  of  the  mighty  works  reported  to 
have  been  done  by  him  throughout  GaUlee,  but  they  could  not 
account  for  these  things  in  one  whom  they  had  known  simply  as  the 
carpenter,  the  son  of  one  of  the  village  households,  a  man  who  had 
grown  up  among  themselves;  least  of  all  did  they  relish  the  apphca- 
tion  which  he  doubtless  made  of  the  Scripture  he  had  read  (cf.  Lk. 
4  :  21).  As  a  consequence,  they  were  offended  in  him,  i.e.  they 
resented  the  fact  that  he,  being  to  them  the  commonplace  man  that 
he  was,  should  intrude  himself  upon  them,  not  only  as  an  interpreter  of 
God's  word,  but  as  the  one  in  whom  its  prophecies  of  Messianic  times 
were  fulfilled.  Mary:  Luke's  phrasing  of  the  people's  exclamation 
indicates  their  natural  reference  to  Jesus  as  Joseph's  son  (4  :  22; 

91 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

and  brother  of  ^  James,  and  Joses,  and  Judas,  and 
Simon?  and  are  not  his  sisters  here  with  us?    And 

4.  they  were  ^  offended  in  him.  And  Jesus  said  unto 
them,  A  prophet  is  not  without  honor,  save  in  his 
own  country,  and  among  his  own  kin,  and  in  his  own 

5.  house.  And  he  could  there  do  no  ^  mighty  work,  save 
that  he  laid  his  hands  upon  a  few  sick  folk,  and 

6.  healed  them.  And  he  marvelled  because  of  their 
unbelief. 

And  he  went  round  about  the  villages  teaching. 

1  Jacob.  2  Grk.  caused  to  stumble.  3  Grk.  power. 

cf.  Jn.  6  :  42);  the  mention  by  Mark  of  only  his  Mother's  name  is 
unusual  and  has  significant  bearing  on  the  question  whether  his 
Father  was  still  alive.  Brother:  These  four,  whose  names  are 
given  only  here  and  in  the  parallel  passage  in  Matthew  (13  :  55 — 
"Joseph"  being  merely  another  form  of  "Joses"),  were,  most  prob- 
ably, full  brothers  of  Jesus.  Here  with  us:  The  reference  to  his 
sisters  as  being  resident  in  Nazareth  may  indicate  that  they  were 
married  and  living  in  homes  of  their  own  in  that  place. 

4-6a.  A  prophet  is  not  without  honor:  This  is  Jesus'  way  of  ac- 
counting for  the  manner  of  his  reception.  It  was  not  because  he 
came  back  to  his  townspeople  as  one  of  themselves;  but  because,  as 
one  of  themselves,  he  came  back  to  them  as  a  prophet.  As  a  general 
thing,  people  do  not  willingly  accept  the  preaching  of  one  whom  they 
consider  no  better  than  themselves.  This  is  strikingly  true  when  one 
preaches  to  his  own  kinsfolk  and  within  his  own  home.  (For  the  use 
of  this  same  proverb  on  another  occasion,  see  Jn.  4  :  44.)  He  could  do 
there  no  mighty  work:  The  reason  for  Jesus'  rejection  at  Nazareth, 
as  in  the  case  of  every  prophet,  was  the  strange  failure  to  appreciate 
him  on  the  part  of  those  who  should  have  been  able  best  to  under- 
stand him.  Another  reason  was  the  lack  of  spiritual  sympathy  with 
him  and  his  work  that  made  it  impossible  for  him  to  carry  on  his 
work  in  their  midst.  Such  small  acts  of  healing  as  he  did  accomplish 
must  have  preceded  this  discourse  in  the  synagogue,  since  it  was 
followed  by  his  expulsion  from  the  town  (cf.  Lk.  4  :  28-30).  Perhaps, 
the  meagreness  of  this  healing  added  to  their  unfavorable  opinion  of 
him,  as  Jesus  analyzed  it  (cf.  Lk.  4  :  23).  Marvelled — not  in  the 
sense  of  being  unable  to  account  for  it;  since  he  had  shown  the  reason 
for  it  and  had  confronted  it  with  the  results  which  inevitably  must 

92 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

7.  And  he  calleth  unto  him  the  twelve,  and  began  to 
send  them  forth  by  two  and  two;  and  he  gave  them 

8.  authority  over  the  unclean  spirits;  and  he  charged 
them  that  they  should  take  nothing  for  their  journey, 
save  a  staff  only;   no  bread,  no  wallet,  no  money 

9.  in  their  purse;  but  to  go  shod  with  sandals:  and,  said 

follow  upon  it  (cf.  Lk.  4  :  25-27),  but  in  the  sense  of  condemning  it 
as  that  which  he  had  no  reason  to  expect.  In  this  same  sense — but 
from  the  contrary  point  of  view — he  had  marvelled  at  the  Centurion's 
faith  (Matt.  8  :  10). 

{if)  A  Third  Preaching  Tour,  6  :  6b-ij 

(For  the  Second  Tour  see  note  on  3  :  i9b-2i.) 

6b.  He  went  about  the  villages  teaching:  Beyond  this  single  sen- 
tence, Mark  does  not  refer  to  the  incidents  of  this  tour,  while  Luke 
makes  no  mention  of  the  tour  at  all.  Matthew,  however,  summarizes 
its  happenings  at  the  close  of  his  first  group  of  miracles  (9  :  35;  vs. 
36-38  are  probably  connected  with  other  events). 

7.  It  is  in  connection  with  this  tour  that  the  Twelve  are  sent  out. 
Their  mission  is  not  likely  to  have  been  to  the  villages  involved  in  the 
itinerary,  but  to  a  wider  range  of  territory,  which  it  would  have  been 
impossible  for  him  alone  to  reach  (cf.  vs.  11-13),  which  seem  to  in- 
dicate a  mission  belonging  distinctly  to  the  Twelve,  and  ver.  14, 
where  the  information  which  came  to  Herod  seems  to  have  depended 
on  a  more  extensive  spread  of  a  heralding  and  wonder-working  minis- 
try than  would  have  been  comprised  in  a  single  circuit  of  villages  such 
as  he  was  making  (cf.  also  Matt.  10  :  5).  The  motive  for  this  mission 
was  doubtless  Jesus'  consciousness  of  a  growing  hostility  against  him, 
so  strikingly  called  to  his  mind  by  his  experience  at  Nazareth.  This 
would  naturally  urge  him  to  a  speedy  spreading  of  the  announcement 
of  the  Kingdom  throughout  Galilee  before  his  ministry  there  should 
be  brought  to  a  close.  Two  and  two — enough  for  companionship,  not 
enough  for  controversy  (cf.  9  :  33-35;  Lk.  22  :  24).  Authority  over 
the  unclean  spirits:  As  is  clear  from  ver.  13,  this  was  accompanied 
with  power  to  heal  diseases  (Lk.  9  :  2;  cf.  also  Matt.  10  :  i;  Lk.  9  :  if.), 
and,  from  Matthew's  statement  (10  :  8),  even  with  power  to  raise  the 
dead;  while  the  command  to  herald  the  nearness  of  the  kingdom 
(cf.  Matt.  10  :  7)  and  to  call  upon  the  people  to  repent  (cf.  ver.  12) 
appears  to  have  formed  the  essential  feature  of  their  commission. 

8,  9.  These  verses  contain  restrictions  as  to  the  equipment  of 
the  missioners  for  their  journey.    The  purpose  of  these  restrictions 

93 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

10.  he,  put  not  on  two  coats.  And  he  said  unto  them, 
Wheresoever  ye  enter  into  a  house,  there  abide  till 

11.  ye  depart  thence.  And  whatsoever  place  shall  not 
receive  you,  and  they  hear  you  not,  as  ye  go  forth 
thence,  shake  off  the  dust  that  is  under  your  feet  for  a 

12.  testimony   unto   them.     And   they   went   out,   and 

was  evidently  to  impress  upon  them  the  seriousness  of  their  mission. 
They  are  not  to  consider  so  much  their  comfort  and  convenience  as 
their  work;  for  the  situation,  as  the  Master  saw  it,  was  urgent. 
A  staff — always  taken  by  the  traveller,  whatever  else  he  might  omit 
(cf.  Gen.  32  :  10).  Matthew  and  Luke  prohibit  even  this.  Wallet — 
a  leathern  sack  for  carrying  provisions  (cf.  2  Kings  4  :  42).  Money 
(lit.  brass) — the  common  coin  of  Palestine.  Luke  substitutes  "silver  " 
and  Matthew  adds  "no  gold,  nor  silver."  Purse  (lit.  girdle) — used 
for  carrying  small  change,  or  for  secreting  larger  sums.  Different 
from  the  bag  referred  to  in  Lk.  10  14;  22  :  35f.  Sandals — a  sole  of 
leather,  or  wood,  bound  to  the  foot  with  thongs.  Matthew'';  term 
"shoes"  (10  :  10)  which  he  forbids,  clearly  refers  to  the  same  article. 
Luke  makes  no  mention  of  them.  Coats — the  tunic,  or  undergar- 
ment, worn  next  to  the  skin.  In  Matt.  5  :  40,  it  is  distinguished  from 
the  "cloak,"  which  was  the  mantle  or  outer  garment  thrown  over  the 
tunic  (cf.  also  Jn,  19  :  23;  Acts  9  :  39). 

10,  II.  The  directions  in  these  two  verses  continue  the  purpose  of 
impressing  upon  the  Twelve  the  urgent  character  of  their  mission. 
When  they  have  found  a  lodging  (Matthew  adds  that  they  are  to 
select  only  such  as  is  "worthy";  cf.  10  :  11-13),  they  are  to  remain  in 
it  until  their  mission  in  the  place  is  finished.  They  are  not  to  change 
from  house  to  house,  seeking  better  entertainment  (cf.  Lk.  10  :  7); 
for  their  object  in  the  lodging  is  not  to  secure  a  place  of  ease,  but  a 
center  of  work.  On  the  other  hand,  should  the  place  to  which  they 
come  not  receive  them  or  their  message,  they  are  not  to  delay  and 
attempt  to  win  the  people  of  the  place  from  their  unfriendliness,  but 
to  depart,  testifying,  through  a  well  known  symbolic  act,  not  only 
their  own  freedom  from  responsibility  in  the  case,  but  the  barrier  to 
fellowship  which  their  unreceptive  action  had  established  (cf.  Acts 
13  151;  18  :6).  Matthew  extends  these  directions  to  great  length 
(10  :  15-42),  incorporating  among  them,  apparently,  some  sayings 
from  later  occasions  {e.g.  vs.  17-22;  cf.  also  34-36,  38f.);  while  Luke 
has  reproduced  the  substance  of  the  Matthew  version  in  connection 
with  a  subsequent  mission  of  a  larger  group  of  disciples  (10  :  1-16). 

12,  13.  Anointed  with  oil — a  familiar  specific  in  the  medical 
treatment  of  that  time.    It  was  used,  consequently,  as  a  symbol  of  the 

94 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


13.  preached  that  men  should  repent.  And  they  cast 
out  many  demons,  and  anointed  with  oil  many  that 
were  sick,  and  healed  them. 

14.  And  king  Herod  heard  thereof;  for  his  name  had 
become  known:  and  ^  he  said,  John  the  Baptizer  is 
risen  from  the  dead,  and  therefore  do  these  powers 

15.  work  in  him.    But  others  said.  It  is  Elijah.    And  others 

16.  said,  It  is  a  prophet,  even  as  one  of  the  prophets.  But 
Herod,  when  he  heard  thereof,  said,  John,  whom  I 


1  Some  MSS.  read  they. 


divine  healing  which  they  were  ministering.    The  practice  seems  to 
have  been  continued  in  the  early  Church  (cf.  Jas.  5  :  14)- 

{14)  Herod's  Opinion  of  Jesus,  with  the  Story  of  the  Baptist's  Imprison- 
ment and  Death,  6  :  14-29 
14-16   King  Herod— Herod  Antipas,  by  the  will  of  his  father, 
Herod  the  Great,  appointed  tetrarch  of  Galilee  and  Persea,  one  of  the 
four  portions  into  which  this  ruler  divided  his  kmgdom  among  his 
sons      Over  those   countries  he   ruled   from   4  B.C.  uMil  37  a.d  , 
maintaining  a  policy  of  friendliness  to  the  Romans  and  of  shrewd 
regard  for  the  religious  scruples  of  the  Jews.    He  interested  himself  in 
the  building  of  cities,  his  greatest  undertaking  being  the  erection  of 
Tiberias,  on  the  Sea  of  Galilee  (Jn.  6  :  23),  which  he  made  his  capital, 
and  which  gave  its  name  to  the  Lake  (Jn.  6  :  i ;  21  :  i).    This  Herod  is 
the  one  most  frequently  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament  (»  :  i5» 
Lk    q  •  I    10-  8  :  ^;  13  :  3if.;  23  :  7-15;  Acts  4  :  27;  i3  :  i)-   ,Marlt 
gK-e'him  h?;e  his'courtesy  title  of  ''king";  Matthew  and  Luke,  his 
more  accurate  title  of  "tetrarch"  (Matt.  14  :  i;  Lk.  9:7)..  Heard 
thereof:  It  is  not  likely,  from  such  statements  as  are  made  in  i  :  2» 
and  7,  :  8,  that  this  was  the  first  information  of  Jesus  that  had  come  to 
Herod.    Doubtless,  this  last  preaching  tour,  together  with  the  wider 
mission  of  the  Twelve,  had  greatly  spread  the  fame  of  his  mimstry 
and  brought  it  anew  to  the  hearing  of  the  King;  but  even  then,  it 
would  not  have  arrested  his  attention,  had  it  not  been  for  the  con- 
jectures which  accompanied  it  and  which  were,  in  all  probability, 
due  to  the  spirit  of  Messianic  expectancy  among  the  people  (ct. 
Lk    ^  •  IS-  Matt.  12  :  23).    These  conjectures  were  confused:  borne 
said  that  John,  the  Baptizer,  is  risen  from  the  dead  (cf.  Lk.  9  :  7)- 
The  fact  that  John  had  been  held  to  be  a  prophet;  that  he  had  been 
wickedly  put  to  death;  and  that  Jesus  was  preachmg  the  same  mes- 


95 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

17.  beheaded,  he  is  risen.  For  Herod  himself  had  sent 
forth  and  laid  hold  upon  John,  and  bound  him  in 
prison  for  the  sake  of  Herodias,  his  brother  Philip's 

18.  wife;  for  he  had  married  her.  For  John  said  unto 
Herod,  It  is  not  lawful  for  thee  to  have  thy  brother's 

sage  of  the  nearness  of  the  kingdom  as  he  had  preached,  would  not 
make  unnatural  the  superstitious  idea  that  this  man  of  God  had 
returned  to  life,  with  supernatural  powers  (therefore  do  these  powers 
work  in  him,  cf.  Jn.  10  :  41).  Others,  less  credulous,  gave  expression 
to  the  common  belief,  founded  on  Mai.  4:5,  that  Elijah  would  come 
as  a  precursor  of  the  Messiah  (cf.  9  :  iif.;  Matt.  11  :  14),  and  identi- 
fied him  with  that  prophet  with  whom  John  himself  had  refused  to 
be  identified  (Jn.  i  :  21);  while  others,  not  knowing  how  to  identify 
him,  held  him  to  be  one  of  the  old  prophets  come  again  to  earth 
(cf.  Lk.  9:8;  Matt.  16  :  14).  The  guilty  conscience  of  Herod,  in 
spite  of  the  Sadducean  scepticism  to  which  he  was  more  than  likely 
predisposed  (cf.  Matt.  16  :  11  with  Mk.  8  :  14),  was  not  only  startled 
by  these  conjectures,  but  it  fixed  upon  the  one  that  made  Jesus  out 
to  be  the  resurrected  John. 

17,  18.  The  story  of  John's  imprisonment  and  death  is  here  in- 
troduced, to  account  for  the  statement  of  his  beheading.  Matthew 
has  an  extended  account  of  this  event  (Matt.  14  :  1-12),  though  not 
as  detailed  as  Mark's.  Luke  makes,  however,  nothing  more  than  a 
mere  mention  of  the  fact  (3  :  i9f.).  Laid  hold  .  .  .  bound  him  in 
prison:  This  was  done  before  Jesus  began  his  Galilean  work  (i  :  14); 
in  fact,  it  seems  to  have  been  the  reason  for  his  leaving  Judaea  and 
going  into  Galilee  (Matt.  4  :  12;  see  note  on  i  :  14).  He  was  impris- 
oned in  the  fortress  attached  to  the  palace  of  Machaerus — a  rocky 
citadel,  on  the  East  side  of  the  Dead  Sea,  opposite  the  wilderness  of 
Judaea  and  thus  within  sight  of  the  scene  of  his  early  work.  His 
captivity  continued  until  well  after  the  beginning  of  Jesus'  Galilean 
work  (Matt.  11  :  2f.;  Lk.  7  :  18),  though  Matthew  can  hardly  be 
accurate  in  making  his  death  to  have  occurred  as  late  as  at  the  close 
of  this  mission  of  the  Twelve  (14  :  12-14).  Herodias — the  daughter 
of  Aristobulus,  the  son  of  Herod  the  Great  and  Mariamme,  grand- 
daughter of  Hyrcanus  II.  She  was,  therefore,  niece,  not  only  of 
Antipas,  but  of  his  half-brother  Philip,  her  first  husband.  This 
Philip  was  not  the  tetrarch  of  Ituraea  (Lk.  3:1),  but  another  half- 
brother  of  Antipas,  son  of  Herod's  third  wife,  Mariamme,  daughter 
of  Simon,  the  High  Priest.  Not  lawful:  As  wife  of  his  brother,  who 
was  still  living,  the  marriage  came  under  the  strict  prohibitions  of  the 
law  (cf.  Lev.  18  :  16). 

96 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

19.  wife.    And  Herodias  set  herself  against  him,  and  de- 

20.  sired  to  kill  him;  and  she  could  not;  for  Herod  feared 
John,  knowing  that  he  was  a  righteous  and  holy  man, 
and  kept  him  safe.    And  when  he  heard  him,  he  ^  was 

21.  much  perplexed;  and  he  heard  him  gladly.  And 
when  a  convenient  day  was  come,  that  Herod  on 
his  birthday  made  a  supper  to  his  lords,  and  the  ^  high 

22.  captains,  and  the  chief  men  of  Galilee;  and  when  ^  the 
daughter  of  Herodias  herself  came  in  and  danced, 

1  Many  MSS.  read  did  many  things.  2  military  tribunes  Grk.  chiliarchs. 

3  Some  MSS.  read  his  daughter  Herodias. 

19,  20.  Set  herself  against  him:  Herodias'  attitude  toward  the 
Baptist  was  one  of  murderous  hatred;  Herod's,  because  of  the  moni- 
tions of  conscience,  was  one  of  fear  mingled  with  appreciation.  His 
imprisonment  of  the  preacher  was  due,  not  so  much  to  personal 
anger,  as  to  dread  of  his  influence  among  the  people  (cf.  Matt.  14  :  5). 
In  fact,  by  imprisoning  him  he  sought  to  prevent,  not  only  his  possible 
rousing  of  the  people  against  him  (cf.  Josephus,  Antiquities,  XVHI, 
V.  2),  but,  according  to  our  Evangelist,  the  wreaking  of  Herodias' 
wrath  upon  him;  since  this  would  only  have  inflamed  the  people's 
feelings  and  disturbed  his  own,  for  he  knew  that  he  was  a  righteous 
and  holy  man,  and  so  he  kept  him  safe.  With  this  attitude  toward 
him,  it  was  natural  that  frequently  he  should  send  for  him,  to  hear 
him  discourse,  and  just  as  natural  that  the  discourse,  though  approved 
by  his  moral  sense,  should  leave  him  in  a  confusion  of  purpose  and 
an  impotence  of  will. 

21 .  Convenient — i.e.  for  the  realizing  of  Herodias'  purpose.  There 
was  more  likelihood  of  securing  the  King's  consent  to  her  wish  in 
the  flushed  excitement  of  such  a  festivity  as  this  than  when  the  sober 
thoughts  of  his  personal  and  political  responsibilities  controlled  him. 
Lords:  These  were  the  chief  civil  dignitaries  of  his  tetrarchy,  as  the 
high  captains  were  its  chief  military  ofl5cials  (cf.  Rev.  6  :  15);  while 
the  chief  men  of  Galilee  were  most  likely  the  nobility  of  the  province, 
representing  the  native  population,  as  over  against  the  civil  and  mili- 
tary officials,  who  were,  in  all  probability,  foreign. 

22-29.  The  daughter  of  Herodias — Salome,  who  afterwards  mar- 
ried Philip,  the  tctrarch  of  Trachonitis,  her  maternal  uncle,  and 
later,  Aristobulus,  King  of  Chalcis.  The  implacable  hatred  of  Hero- 
dias is  seen  in  this  willingness  to  degrade  her  daughter,  a  princess, 
to  the  level  of  the  hired  dancers,  who  belonged  to  a  confessedly  im- 

97 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

^  she  pleased  Herod  and  them  that  sat  at  meat  with 
him;  and  the  king  said  unto  the  damsel,  Ask  of  me 

23.  whatsoever  thou  wilt,  and  I  will  give  it  thee.  And 
he  sware  unto  her,  Whatsoever  thou  shalt  ask  of  me, 

24.  I  will  give  it  thee,  unto  the  half  of  my  kingdom.  And 
she  went  out,  and  said  unto  her  mother.  What  shall 
I  ask?  And  she  said,  The  head  of  John  the  Baptizer, 

25.  And  she  came  in  straightway  with  haste  unto  the 
king,  and  asked,  saying,  I  will  that  thou  forthwith 

26.  give  me  on  a  platter  the  head  of  John  the  Baptist.  And 
the  king  was  exceeding  sorry;  but  for  the  sake  of  his 
oaths,  and  of  them  that  sat  at  meat,  he  would  not 


moral  class,  in  the  hope  of  entrapping  the  king  into  her  plot  against 
the  Baptist.  If  the  marginal  reading  "his  daughter  Herodias  " — 
which  is  better  attested — should  be  substituted  for  the  text,  it  would 
indicate  that  the  maid  was  a  namesake  of  her  mother  and  a  child 
of  the  present  marriage.  It  is  not  likely,  however,  that  Herodias 
would  assign  Herod's  own  child  to  such  a  task.  Her  hope  was  reahzed, 
for  the  dancing  of  the  girl  pleased  Herod,  and  he  bade  her  ask  of 
him  what  she  would,  confirming  it  with  an  oath  that  committed  him 
to  the  granting  of  her  request,  even  to  the  half  of  his  kingdom  (cf. 
Esther  5  :  3,  6;  7  :  2).  While  the  daughter  and  the  mother  doubtless 
were  in  full  sympathy  with  each  other,  it  is  clear  that  the  girl  had 
not  been  let  into  the  details  of  the  plot;  for  she  had  to  seek  Herodias 
in  order  to  learn  what  request  she  was  to  make.  In  fact,  that  a  re- 
quest was  permitted  her  was  evidently  a  surprise,  for  the  King's 
following  of  his  statement  with  an  oath  was  most  likely  due  to  the 
hesitancy  of  her  first  astonishment  at  his  words  (Matthew's  record, 
14  :6-i2,  is  manifestly  contracted).  Whether  Salome  needed  urg- 
ing— as  Matthew's  phrase,  "being  put  forward  by  her  mother," 
might  seem  to  imply — or  not,  she  promptly  presents  to  the  King 
her  mother's  wish,  an  essential  part  of  which  was  the  demand  for  its 
immediate  fulfilment.  This  would  indicate  that  the  banquet  was 
held  in  the  palace  of  Machaerus.  The  King's  sorrow  was  an  admix- 
ture of  genuine  vexation  and  grief  (cf.  Lk.  18  :  23),  which,  however, 
was  not  strong  enough  to  overcome  the  fancied  honor  involved  in  his 
rash  oath — an  oath  which  in  his  vassal  relations  to  Rome  could  never 

98 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

27.  reject  her.  And  straightway  the  king  sent  forth  a 
soldier  of  his  guard,  and  commanded  to  bring  his  head: 

28.  and  he  went  and  beheaded  him  in  the  prison,  and 
brought  his  head  on  a  platter,  and  gave  it  to  the 

29.  damsel;  and  the  damsel  gave  it  to  her  mother.  And 
when  his  disciples  heard  thereof^  they  came  and  took 
up  his  corpse,  and  laid  it  in  a  tomb. 

30.  And  the  apostles  gather  themselves  together  unto 
Jesus;  and  they  told  him  all  things,  whatsoever  they 

31.  had  done,  and  whatsoever  they  had  taught.  And  he 
saith  unto  them.  Come  ye  yourselves  apart  into  a 
desert  place,  and  rest  a  while.  For  there  were  many 
coming  and  going,  and  they  had  no  leisure  so  much 

32.  as  to  eat.  And  they  went  away  in  the  boat  to  a  desert 
T,^.  place  apart.    And /Ae /)e6>^/g  saw  them  going,  and  many 

knew  them,  and  they  ran  together  there  ^  on  foot 

1  by  land. 

have  been  literally  fulfilled,  and  which  now  was  being  kept  probably 
more  through  a  pride  in  his  relations  towards  those  that  were  with  him 
at  the  banquet  than  through  any  regard  for  the  character  of  his  oath 
as  such.  A  soldier  of  his  guard  (lit.  a  spy,  or  scout) — a  term  applied 
to  soldiers  employed  to  keep  a  lookout  or  carry  despatches.  They 
formed  a  distinct  corps  and  were  employed  by  the  emperors  as  a 
bodyguard,  in  which  capacity  they  would  naturally  be  selected  for 
the  carrying  out  of  imperial  sentences  (cf.  Schiirer,  I,  ii,  63).  Herod 
seems  to  have  had  some  such  bodyguard,  from  whose  members  he 
selected  one  to  execute  his  sentence  upon  the  Baptist.  Platter  (A.  V. 
"charger") — a  flat  dish,  either  of  earthenware  or  metal.  The  dis- 
ciples .  .  .  took  up  his  corpse  and  laid  it  in  a  tomb :  Their  permission 
to  bury  the  body  was  due,  doubtless,  to  Herod's  sorrowful  realization 
of  what  he  had  been  allured  into  allowing  to  be  done. 

(75)  The  Feeding  of  the  Five  Thousaiid,  6  :  30-44  {56) 

30-33.  The  Apostles:  Mark  here  gives  the  disciples  the  name  by 
which  they  were  better  known  when  he  wrote,  not  in  its  official  sense, 
but  as  an  appropriate  designation  of  those  who  had  been  "sent  forth" 

99 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

34.  from  all  the  cities,  and  outwent  them.  And  he  came 
forth  and  saw  a  great  multitude,  and  he  had  compas- 
sion on  them,  because  they  were  as  sheep  not  having 
a  shepherd:  and  he  began  to  teach  them  many  things. 

35.  And  when  the  day  was  now  far  spent,  his  disciples 
came  unto  him,  and  said,  The  place  is  desert,  and  the 

on  this  tour  and  were  now  returning  from  it  (cf.  6:7).  Gather 
themselves  .  .  .  unto  Jesus — from  the  various  directions  in  which 
they  had  gone,  to  some  previously  appointed  place,  obviously  on  the 
Western  side  of  the  Lake  and  most  Hkely  Capernaum.  Come  .  .  . 
into  a  desert  place  and  rest — not  in  the  immediate  neighborhood 
of  their  gathering  place  (see  notes  on  i  :  35,  45),  but  across  the 
Lake  (as  in  4  :  35),  quite  probably  in  the  neighborhood  of  Bethsaida 
Julias  (cf.  Lk.  9  :  10,  12).  They  ran  .  .  .  there  on  foot — around 
the  North  end  of  the  Lake,  having  seen  them  depart  and  surmising 
their  destination  from  the  direction  in  which  they  were  headed. 
Naturally,  they  told  of  their  quest  as  they  went,  and  so  added  to 
their  numbers  from  all  the  cities  through  which  they  passed.  Event- 
ually, Mark  says,  they  reached  the  other  side  of  the  Lake  ahead  of 
them.  This  might  be  possible,  if  the  wind  was  light  or  contrary; 
since  the  distance  by  land  was  but  ten  miles,  while  that  by  water 
was  four.  The  record  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  however,  would  seem 
to  indicate  that  Jesus  and  the  disciples  reached  the  other  side  first 
and  went  up  the  mountain  to  their  place  of  retirement,  from  which, 
later  on,  Jesus  beheld  the  multitude  and  came  down  to  them  (Jn. 
6  :  i-s). 

34.  Came  forth — from  the  boat.  Had  compassion  on  them — in 
spite  of  their  having  prevented  his  plan  for  retirement;  because, 
through  this  impulsive  and  eager  following  of  him,  there  was  brought 
to  him  afresh  their  need  of  and  readiness  for  a  true  religious  leader- 
ship. So,  putting  aside  his  desire  for  rest,  he  began  to  teach  them 
many  things — not  in  the  sense  of  diversified  themes,  for  evidently 
there  was  but  the  one  theme  of  the  kingdom  of  God  (cf.  Lk.  9  :  11), 
but  in  the  sense  of  an  abundance  of  teaching  on  this  one  theme. 

35-38.  The  day  was  ...  far  spent:  The  Passover  being  near,  it 
would  be  the  time  of  the  Spring  Equinox,  the  sun  setting  about  six 
o'clock;  so  that  the  teaching  had  continued  into  the  late  afternoon. 
The  place  is  desert,  and,  consequently,  the  people,  who  in  their  hurry 
had  brought  no  provisions  with  them,  could  get  food  for  their  long 
delayed  meal  only  by  being  dismissed  and  allowed  to  go  to  the  sur- 
rounding country  (Ut.  tilled  fields,  farms,  cf.  5  :  14)  and  nearby 
villages.    According  to  John  (6  15),  the  colloquy  was  begun  by 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

36.  day  is  now  far  spent;  send  them  away,  that  they  may 
go  into  the  country  and  villages  round  about,  and  buy 

37.  themselves  somewhat  to  eat.  But  he  answered  and 
said  unto  them,  Give  ye  them  to  eat.  And  they  say 
unto  him.  Shall  we  go  and  buy  two  hundred  shillings' 

38.  worth  of  bread,  and  give  them  to  eat?  And  he  saith 
unto  them.  How  many  loaves  have  ye?  go  and  see. 
And  when  they  knew,  they  say,  Five,  and  two  fishes. 

39.  And  he  commanded  them  that  all  should  ^  sit  down 

'  recline,  lie  down. 

Jesus.  The  following  answer  of  the  disciples  gives  us  really  a  com- 
bination of  John's  statement,  of  Jesus'  query,  and  of  Philip's  reply. 
Shall  we  go  and  buy:  The  disciples  had  no  idea  of  Jesus'  plan,  and, 
apparently,  no  appreciation  of  his  power  over  the  supplies  of  nature 
(cf.  Jn.  6:9).  The  incident  at  the  Wedding  Feast  at  Cana  had  been 
forgotten;  the  recent  stilling  of  the  storm  may  have  assured  them  of 
his  control  of  Nature,  but  it  had  led  them  to  no  inference  as  to  his 
power  immediately  to  create  what  Nature  produces.  Two  hundred 
shillings  (lit.  denarii)  worth:  The  denarius  was  the  day  wage  of  the 
laborer  (Matt.  20  :  2) — somewhat  less  than  twenty  cents.  Two 
hundred  denarii — about  forty  dollars — would  be  far  more  than  the 
disciples  had  in  their  common  purse,  and  would  represent  their  con- 
viction as  to  the  hopelessness  of  the  undertaking  (cf.  14  :  5;  Lk.  7  :  41). 
How  many  loaves  have  ye?  They  may  not  have  had  any  provisions, 
expecting  to  supply  themselves  from  the  villages  as  they  had  need, 
during  their  absence  (cf.  Jn.  4:8).  According  to  the  Fourth  Evange- 
list (6  :  8f.),  it  is  Andrew  who  discovers  the  five  loaves  (a  small  flat 
cake,  fairly  thick,  about  the  size  of  a  plate,  suflicient  for  a  meal;  cf. 
Lk.  II  :  5f.),  which  he  says  were  made  of  barley  (the  grain  of  the 
poor;  cf.  2  Kings  7  :  18),  and  the  two  fishes  (cooked  or  dried,  as  a 
relish  with  the  bread;  cf.  Jn.  21  :  9,  13),  in  the  possession  of  a  lad 
who,  doubtless  attracted  by  the  crowd,  was  oflfering  them  for  sale. 
39-44.  By  companies  (lit.  symposia  by  symposia) — to  secure  an 
orderly  arrangement  for  the  distribution  of  the  food.  Green  grass — 
the  fresh,  young  grass  of  the  springtime.  In  ranks  (lit.  garden  plots 
by  garden  plots) — rectangular  groups,  with  passageways  between 
them.  Looking  up  to  heaven:  This  marked  the  Master's  conscious- 
ness of  the  significance  of  what  he  was  about  to  do  (cf.  7  :  34;  Jn. 
II  :  41),  the  blessing  of  the  food  (see  Edersheim,  I,  p.  684,  for  the  usual 
form),  and  the  breaking  of  the  bread — the  loaves,  being  relatively 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

40.  by  companies  upon  the  green  grass.     And  they  sat 

41.  down  in  ranks,  by  hundreds,  and  by  fifties.  And  he 
took  the  five  loaves  and  the  two  fishes,  and  looking 
up  to  heaven,  he  blessed,  and  brake  the  loaves;  and 
he  gave  to  the  disciples  to  set  before  them;  and  the  two 

42.  fishes  divided  he  among  them  all.    And  they  all  ate, 

43.  and  were  filled.     And  they  took  up  broken  pieces, 

44.  twelve  basketfuls,  and  also  of  the  fishes.  And  they 
that  ate  the  loaves  were  five  thousand  men. 

45.  And  straightway  he  constrained  his  disciples  to 
enter  into  the  boat,  and  to  go  before  him  unto  the 
other  side  to  Bethsaida,  while  he  himself  sendeth  the 

46.  multitude  away.     And  after  he  had  taken  leave  of 

thin,  were  never  cut — were  the  custom  in  the  daily  meal  (cf.  Lk.  24  : 
30;  Acts  27  :  35).  From  the  following  statement  by  all  the  Synop- 
tists,  as  well  as  by  John,  it  is  clear  that  what  took  place  was  to  them 
distinctly  miraculous.  The  five  loaves  and  the  two  fishes  were  dis- 
tributed among  the  multitude  of  five  thousand,  and  they  all  ate 
and  were  filled,  and  they  took  up  of  the  fragments  remaining  twelve 
basketfuls.  As  far  as  historical  criticism  can  go  in  accrediting  a 
miracle,  the  evidence  is  complete;  the  only  thing  that  will  call  it  in 
question  is  the  presence  of  hostile  presuppositions  in  the  mind  of  the 
critic.  The  discourse  which  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  follows  this  event, 
gives  no  reason  to  believe  that  in  the  Master's  mind  there  was  any 
forecast  of  the  Passover  Meal  in  this  provision  which  he  made  for 
the  multitude's  needs.  The  language  in  that  discourse,  which  specific- 
ally refers  to  the  coming  sacrifice  of  himself  (vs.  51-58),  is  occasioned 
simply  by  the  developed  argument  involved  in  the  presentation  over 
against  their  material  view  of  his  Messiahship  of  the  profoundly  spir- 
itual character  of  his  mission  and  of  their  personal  relationship  to 
him.  In  fact,  with  the  estimate  which  that  discourse  shows  he  had 
of  their  hopelessly  material  attitude  toward  his  work  (ver.  26),  he 
could  hardly  have  had  in  this  meal  provided  for  their  needs  a  foretaste 
of  the  communion  of  the  Passover  meal  with  his  disciples. 

45,  46.  Straightway  he  constrained  his  disciples  ...  to  go 
before  him  unto  the  other  side:  The  reason  for  this  sudden  reversal 
of  his  plan  of  retirement  is  given  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  (6  :  i4f.).  The 
provision  for  the  people's  needs  had  carried  their  enthusiasm  beyond 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

47.  them,  he  departed  into  the  mountain  to  pray.  And 
when  even  was  come,  the  boat  was  in  the  midst  of 

4S.  the  sea,  and  he  alone  on  the  land.  And  seeing  them 
distressed  in  rowing,  for  the  wind  was  contrary  unto 
them,  about  the  fourth  watch  of  the  night  he  cometh 
unto  them,  walking  on  the  sea;  and  he  would  have 

the  acknowledgment  of  him  as  a  prophet  to  a  determination  to  pro- 
claim him  as  their  revolutionary  leader.  Possibly,  to  withdraw  his 
disciples  from  the  contagion  of  such  ideas,  certainly  to  secure  for 
himself  the  quiet  of  communion  with  God,  he  sends  them  across  the 
ba}'  which  separated  the  place  of  the  feeding  from  the  city  of  Beth- 
saida.  (Mentioned  only  by  Mark;  Matthew  says  simply  "unto  the 
other  side,"  14  :  22;  John,  making  no  reference  to  the  Master's  in- 
structions, speaks  of  them  as  "going  over  the  sea  unto  Capernaum," 
6:17,  their  final  gathering  place,  6  :  24,  59):  There  is  no  certain 
evidence  of  the  existence  of  another  city  of  this  name  on  the  Western 
side  of  the  Lake.  There  may  have  been  near  the  newer  Greek  Beth- 
saida  Julias  an  older  Jewish  Bethsaida,  to  which  such  references  as 
Jn.  12:21  would  apply  and  to  which  Jesus  would  resort  in  preference 
to  the  more  fashionable  Greek  city  (see  Guthe's  suggestion,  Bibel- 
worterbuch,  sub  voce  and  plates  14  and  13  of  his  Bihel-Atlas;  also  San- 
day's  Sacred  Sites,  p.  48  and  Map).  Taken  leave  of  them — the 
multitude,  to  dismiss  whom  he  remains  after  sending  his  disciples 
away.  The  multitude  referred  to  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  as  still  on 
the  Eastern  side  of  the  Lake  the  next  day,  6:22,  were  the  enthusiasts 
whom  the  Evangelist  conceives  of  as  remaining  on  the  ground  over- 
night to  witness  more  wonders  and  to  be  fed  again,  ver.  26, — possibly 
to  carry  out  their  revolutionary  plans,  ver.  15.  To  pray:  He  clearly 
foresaw  the  crisis  to  which  the  political  enthusiasm  of  the  multitude 
was  bringing  his  work,  and  sought  in  this  way  to  prepare  himself  for 
it.  If  the  recent  death  of  the  Baptist  had  foreboded  danger  to  him- 
self (see  Lk.  13  :  31-33,  during  his  later  journey  to  Jerusalem),  still 
the  desire  to  withdraw  to  the  retired  regions  of  the  Eastern  shore  of 
the  Lake  was  more  to  afford  his  disciples  rest  after  the  strain  of  their 
tour  and,  for  himself,  to  escape  the  ever-increasing  crowd  that  pressed 
upon  him,  than  to  get  beyond  the  reach  of  Herod.  The  political  out- 
burst of  the  multitude  had  introduced  a  new  and  alarming  element 
into  the  situation,  to  meet  which  he  saw  no  preparation  save  in 
prayer. 

47-52.  When  even  was  come :  The  sun  had  set  (the  Fourth  Gospel 
states  definitely  that  it  was  dark,  6  :  17),  and  the  Passover  moon  had 
risen.   Jesus  was  thus  enabled  to  distinguish  the  boat  in  the  midst  of 

103 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

49.  passed  by  them:  but  they,  when  they  saw  him  walkmg 
on  the  sea,  supposed  that  it  was  a  ghost,  and  cried  out ; 

50.  for  they  all  saw  him,  and  were  troubled.     But  he 
straightway  spake  with  them,  and  saith  unto  them, 

51.  Be  of  good  cheer:  it  is  I;  be  not  afraid.    And  he  went 
up  unto  them  into  the  boat;  and  the  wind  ceased: 

the  sea  (not  geographically,  but  relatively  to  the  land,  i.e.  in  deep 
water),  as  it  labored  against  the  wind  that  had  risen  and  was  driving 
it  down  and  across  the  Lake  towards  the  Western  shore.  But  ev- 
idently he  did  not  altogether  forego  his  vigil,  for  it  was  not  until  the 
fourth  watch  of  the  night  (from  3  to  6  a.m.,  Roman  reckoning)  that 
he  came  to  them.  By  this  time,  the  disciples,  in  spite  of  their  efforts, 
had  been  driven  in  a  tortuous  course  far  from  their  intended  landing 
place.  (The  Fourth  Gospel  says  they  had  gone  25  or  30  stadia,  i.e. 
3  or  4  miles,  6  :  19.)  The  moon  had  set  and  the  wind  was  still  against 
them.  At  this  unexpected  hour  and  to  them  most  unnatural  place, 
the  Master  appears  walking  on  the  sea:  This  was  a  control  of  the 
forces  of  nature  seemingly  more  real,  but  in  fact  not  more  so  than  his 
stilling  of  the  storm  (4  :  35-41).  It  admits  of  no  naturalistic  explana- 
tion. Its  only  alternative  is  pure  legend,  to  account  for  which  re- 
quires ingenuity.  Would  have  passed  them  by:  Doubtless,  his  pur- 
pose was  to  recall  to  their  minds  the  lesson  he  had  sought  to  teach 
them  in  his  stilling  of  the  storm — that  his  mere  presence  with  them 
should  be  enough  to  assure  them  in  any  trouble.  Had  they  thor- 
oughly learned  that  lesson,  they  might  have  believed  his  presence 
would  have  been  granted  them  in  this  present  difficulty;  but  they  were 
slow  of  heart  and  were  not  expecting  him;  so  that,  in  the  darkness, 
they  thought  what  they  saw  was  a  ghost  (lit.  a  phantom,  an  appari- 
tion; cf.  Job  4  :  i5ff.),  and  they  cried  out  in  fear  (cf.  i  :  23).  Indeed, 
according  to  Matthew  (14  :  28-32),  though  Jesus  reassured  them  as  to 
his  identity  (cf.  Lk.  24  :  37ff.),  they  were  not  all  convinced — at  least 
Peter  demanded  additional  proof,  which,  in  its  working  out,  disclosed 
the  smallness  of  his  faith  in  the  protecting  power  of  Jesus'  presence. 
The  wind  ceased:  This  should  have  brought  vividly  to  them  their 
experience  in  the  storm  (4  :  39),  but  they  were  sore  amazed — not 
with  awesome  fear,  as  had  been  the  case  when  the  storm  ceased 
(4  :  41),  but  with  an  astonishment  at  results  which  were  not  looked  for 
in  his  presence,  in  spite  of  the  marvel  of  the  feeding  of  the  multitude 
but  a  few  hours  before  (see  their  even  later  failure  to  appreciate  this 
miracle,  8  :  14-21).  Matthew  states  that  this  amazement  expressed  it- 
self in  a  confession  of  his  Messiahship  (14  :  ^t,),  which  would  be  under- 
stood better  as  the  result  of  the  maturer  Messianic  convictions 

104 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

52.  and  they  were  sore  amazed  in  themselves;  for  they 
understood  not  concerning  the  loaves,  but  their  heart 
was  hardened. 

53.  And  when  they  had  crossed  over,  they  came  to 
the  land  unto  Gennesaret,  and  moored  to  the  shore. 

54.  And  when  they  were  come  out  of  the  boat,  straightway 

55.  the  people  knew  him,  and  ran  round  about  that  whole 
region,  and  began   to  carry  about  on   their   ^  beds 

56.  those  that  were  sick,  where  they  heard  he  was.  And 
wheresoever  he  entered,  into  villages,  or  into  cities,  or 
into  the  country,  they  laid  the  sick  in  the  market- 
places, and  besought  him  that  they  might  touch  if  it 
were  but  the  border  of  his  garment :  and  as  many  as 
touched  ^  him  were  made  whole. 

^pallets.  ^il. 

Uttered  by  Peter  some  months  afterwards  at  Caesarea  Philippi 
(8  :  29),  as  would  also  his  confession  at  the  close  of  Jesus'  discourse 
delivered  in  the  Capernaum  synagogue  the  following  day  (Jn.  6  :  69). 
53-56.  Crossed  over  they  came  to  the  land  unto  Gennesaret 
(better-  Crossed  over  to  the  land,  they  came  unto  Gennesaret):  The  ceas- 
ing of  the  wind  enabled  them  to  make  progress  in  such  direction 
as  they  wished;  but,  as  the  Master  was  now  with  them  and  they  had 
been  driven  so  far  from  Bethsaida,  they  proceeded  towards  the 
Western  shore,  landing  considerably  South  of  Capernaum,  at  the 
Plain  of  Genessaret.  Carry  about  .  .  .  where  they  heard  he  was: 
As  soon  as  they  landed,  Jesus  was  recognized,  and  the  report  of  his 
return  (cf.  vs.  32f.)  was  spread  abroad  through  the  towns  and  villages 
of  that  region,  which  was  thickly  populated.  As  a  result,  they  brought 
to  him  the  sick,  following  up  the  rumor  of  his  whereabouts,  until 
they  found  him.  Villages  .  .  .  cities  ...  the  country  (lit.  tilled 
fields,  farms,  cf.  ver.  36;  5  :  14)— evidently  the  localities  of  that 
region  through  which  he  passed  on  his  way  back  to  Capernaum 
where,  according  to  the  Fourth  Gospel,  he  finally  came — possibly 
that  same  day  (cf.  Jn.  6  :  24,  59).  Market  places:  Strictly,  these 
would  be  found  only  in  the  cities,  but  the  phrase  may  here  be  used 
generally  for  any  open  places  in  the  villages  and  smaller  settlements, 
where  room  could  be  had  to  gather  the  sick  around  Jesus.     The 

105 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

7.      And   there  are  gathered   together   unto  him   the 
Pharisees,    and    certain    of    the    scribes,    who    had 

2.  come    from    Jerusalem,    and    had    seen    that   some 
of  his  disciples  ate  their  bread  with  defiled,   that 

3.  is,  unwashen,   hands.     (For   the   Pharisees,   and  all 

border  of  his  garment  (lit.  the  fringe,  or  tassel,  of  his  outer  garment) : 
Jesus  doubtless  wore  attached  to  the  four  comers  of  his  outer  garment, 
as  required  by  the  Law  of  every  Jew,  tassels  of  twisted  threads  of 
white  wool,  bound  to  the  garment  by  a  cord  of  blue  (cf.  Num.  15  :  38- 
40).  Made  whole:  These  cases  were  not  essentially  different  from 
that  of  the  Woman  in  the  crowd,  except  that  Jesus  was  appealed  to 
before  the  touch  was  made.  There  was  here,  as  with  her,  a  mixture 
of  superstition  and  faith — the  latter,  though  slight,  being  sincere 
and  consequently  effective  to  a  cure  (cf.  5  :  20,  27-29,  and  especially 
the  record  by  Matthew,  9  :  20,  and  Luke,  8  :  44). 

(i<5)  Ceremonial  Criticism  of  the  Pharisees  and  Scribes,  7  : 1-2 j 

7:1,2.  According  to  the  Fourth  Gospel,  when  Jesus  finally  reached 
Capernaum,  the  enthusiasts  who  had  followed  him  across  the  Lake 
from  the  place  of  the  feeding  of  the  multitude,  found  him  and,  ev- 
idently approaching  him  again  in  their  spirit  of  political  revolution, 
drew  from  him  the  discourse  on  the  Bread  of  Life  which  effectually 
alienated  them  and,  in  fact,  most  of  his  disciples  from  his  Ministry 
(cf.  Jn.  6  :  22-66).  It  may  have  been  in  view  of  this  popular  defection 
from  him  that  the  Pharisees  and  Scribes  were  emboldened  to  return 
to  their  criticism  of  the  unceremonialism  which  he  had  countenanced 
and  which  was  still  carried  on  by  the  disciples  who  remained  in  his 
fellowship.  From  Jerusalem:  This  attack  did  not  necessarily  take 
place  immediately  after  the  discourse.  In  fact,  the  presence  of 
certain  Scribes  who  had  come  up  from  Jerusalem  would  seem  to 
indicate  that  it  had  originated  there,  in  which  case  the  Passover 
referred  to  in  Jn.  6  :  4  may  have  taken  place,  and  reports  carried  to 
the  city  of  the  people's  Messianic  enthusiasm  for  Jesus,  with  their 
later  defection  from  him  may  have  alarmed  and  at  the  same  time 
allured  the  religious  leaders  to  a  renewed  attack.  Defiled  (lit. 
common,  cf.  Acts  10  :  14;  Rom.  14  :  14;  Rev.  21  :  27)  .  .  .  im- 
washen  hands:  The  occasion  of  the  attack  was  doubtless  some  meal 
at  which  the  disciples  were  seen  to  be  eating  without  first  having 
observed  the  universal  rule  of  washing  the  hands,  not  so  much  for 
sanitary  purposes  as  to  cleanse  them  from  all  unceremonial  contacts 
which  they  may  have  had. 

3,  4.  From  the  beginning,   the  religious  leaders  had  seen  that 

106 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

the  Jews,  except  they  wash  their  hands  ^  diligently, 

4.  eat  not,  holding  the  tradition  of  the  elders;  and 
when  they  come  from  the  market-place,  except  they 
^  bathe  themselves,  they  eat  not;  and  many  other 
things  there  are,  which  they  have  received  to  hold, 

5.  ^  washings  of  cups,  and  pots,  and  brasen  vessels.'')    And 

1  up  to  the  elbow.  2  Some  MSS.  read  sprinkle  themselves. 

3  Grk.  baptizings.  *  Many  MSS.  add  and  couches. 

the  vital  issue  between  Jesus  and  themselves  was  at  the  point  of 
ceremonialism  (see  notes  on  2  :  6f.).  They  had  already  criticized 
him  for  various  infringements  of  its  more  exact  rules  (see  notes  on 
2  :  16,  24).  Now,  however,  they  seem  to  have  determined  to  go  to 
the  root  of  the  matter;  for  they  select  a  custom  that  was  observed, 
not  only  by  the  Pharisees,  but  by  all  the  Jews  (not  necessarily  the 
masses,  but  rather  the  religiously  inclined  portion  of  the  people), 
seeking  thus  to  place  him  in  opposition  to  the  common  life  of  the 
religious  people.  These  verses  are  a  parenthesis,  in  which  Mark 
gives  a  few  examples  to  show  the  extent  to  which  this  custom  had 
laid  hold  of  their  daily  living.  Diligently  (Gr.  with  the  fist) — most 
likely  by  alternately  rubbing  the  open  hand  with  the  other  hand 
clenched,  so  as  to  thoroughly  cleanse  it.  The  tradition  of  the  elders — 
not  the  Mosaic  Law,  but  the  precepts  of  former  Scribes  and  teachers — 
particularly  the  members  of  the  Great  Synagogue — handed  down 
and  added  to  from  generation  to  generation,  and  finally  embodied  in 
the  Mishna  (cf.  Gal.  i  :  14).  Bathe  themselves:  Whether  this 
was  by  sprinkling  (cf.  Num.  19  :  gflf.),  or  by  immersion  (cf.  2  Kings 
5  :  14),  it  was  an  application  of  water  to  the  entire  body,  in  view  of  the 
more  extensive  defilement  they  were  supposed  to  have  incurred  in 
mingling  with  the  non-Jewish  crowds  and  unclean  objects  of  the 
market  place.  (Note  Moffatt's  conjectural  reading:  "They  decline 
to  eat  what  comes  from  the  market  place  till  they  have  washed  it." 
A  Neiv  Translation  of  the  New  Testament,  Second  Edition,  1913). 
Washings  of  cups  .  .  .  pots  .  .  .  brazen  vessels:  Whatever  the 
mode,  these  purifications  also  involved  the  complete  cleansing  of  the 
utensils.  The  cups  were  ordinary  drinking  cups  of  earthenware  or 
metal  (cf.  9  :4i;  14  :  23);  the  pots  were  pitchers  of  wood  or  stone 
(cf.  Lev.  15  :  12;  Jn.  2  :  6);  the  brazen  vessels  were  cooking  pots  of 
copper  or  brass  (i  Sam.  2  :  14;  2  Chron.  35  :  13).  See  Schiirer, 
Jewish  People,  II,  ii,  p.  io6ff.  Edersheim,  Life  of  the  Messiah,  II, 
p.  gff. 

5-13.  Jesus'  reply  is  measured  by  the  significance  of  the  criticism. 
He  also  goes  to  the  heart  of  the  question.    And  so  he  applies  to  them 

107 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

the  Pharisees  and  the  scribes  ask  him,  Why  walk  not 
thy  disciples  according  to  the  tradition  of  the  elders, 

6.  but  eat  their  bread  with  ^  defiled  hands?  And  he 
said  unto  them,  Well  did  Isaiah  prophesy  of  you  hypo- 
crites, as  it  is  written. 

This  people  honoreth  me  with  their  lips, 
But  their  heart  is  far  from  me. 

7.  But  in  vain  do  they  worship  me, 

Teaching  as  their  doctrines  the  precepts  of  men. 

8.  Ye  leave  the  commandment  of  God,  and  hold  fast 

1  common. 

Isaiah's  denunciation  of  the  hypocritical  worshippers  of  his  day — a 
denunciation  which  the  prophet  declares  to  be  a  word  of  God  himself 
(Isa.  29  :  13).  The  passage  in  its  latter  part  is  here  rendered  after  the 
LXX  rather  than  the  Hebrew,  substituting  for  the  Hebrew  idea  of 
fearing  God  only  as  they  are  directed  by  human  commandment,  the 
LXX  idea  of  the  uselessness  of  their  worship,  in  view  of  the  fact  that 
it  substitutes  human  commands  for  the  law  of  God.  Full  well: 
This  expression  is  not  wholly  ironical,  since  it  points  out  the  thor- 
oughness with  which  they  have  substituted  their  own  rules  for  the 
divine  commands  (cf.  Jn.  4  :  lyf.).  This  statement  is  substantiated 
by  the  following  instance  of  what  their  position  had  brought  them  to 
do.  Its  significance  is  heightened  by  the  fact  that  the  divine  com- 
mand is  taken  from  the  Decalogue  (Ex.  20  :  12),  while  its  interpreta- 
tion and  the  extreme  penalty  placed  upon  its  transgression  so  inter- 
preted (Ex.  21  :  17,  cf.  margin  and  Deut.  27  :  16)  discloses  the 
importance  attached  to  it  by  the  Mosaic  Law.  That  this  honoring  of 
one's  parents  involved  their  support  was  not  questioned  by  the 
Rabbis;  but  the  support  of  the  Temple  worship  was  also  a  divine 
command,  and  they  had  established  the  rule  that  the  Temple  support 
should  take  precedence  over  parental  support,  in  fact,  a  son,  by  simply 
declaring  to  his  parents  that  the  aid  which  they  expected  from  him 
was  Corban  (transliteration  of  the  Hebrew  word,  meaning  an  offering^ 
an  oblation,  i.e.  a  gift,  or,  as  the  Revised  Version  phrases  it,  given 
to  God),  he  would  be  released  from  the  obligation  of  using  it  for  their 
support,  whether  it  was  actually  given  to  the  Temple  or  not.  The 
declaration  did  not  necessarily  dedicate  it  to  the  Temple;  it  simply 
removed  it  beyond  the  parents'  reach  (cf .  Edersheim,  Life  of  Jesus, 
II,  pp.  19-21).    And  this  was  but  one  of  many  similar  instances. 

108 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

9.  the  tradition  of  men.     And  he  said  unto  them,  Full 
well  do  ye  reject  the  commandment  of  God,  that  ye 

10.  may  keep  your  tradition.  For  Moses  said,  Honor 
thy  father  and  thy  mother;  and.  He  that  speaketh 

11.  evil  of  father  or  mother,  let  him  ^  die  the  death:  but 
ye  say,  If  a  man  shall  say  to  his  father  or  his  mother, 
That  wherewith   thou  mightest  have  been  profited 

12.  by  me  is  Corban,  that  is  to  say,  Given  to  God;  ye  no 
longer  suffer  him  to  do  aught  for  his  father  or  his 

13.  mother;  making  void  the  word  of  God  by  your  tra- 
dition, which  ye  have  delivered:  and  many  such  like 

14.  things  ye  do.  And  he  called  to  him  the  multitude 
again,  and  said  unto  them.  Hear  me  all  of  you,  and 

1  surely  die. 

They  had  practically  made  the  moral  law  of  God  inoperative  by 
placing  the  mechanical  tradition  of  the  elders  in  the  supreme  control 
of  life. 

14,  15.  And  he  called  ...  the  multitude  again:  This  implies 
a  previous  withdrawal  of  the  multitude — doubtless  merely  a  respect- 
ful drawing  back  at  the  formal  approach  of  the  Jerusalem  delegation. 
It  might  seem  strange  that  after  the  alienation  of  the  people  from 
Jesus  there  was  still  a  multitude  which  gathered  to  his  teaching;  but 
we  must  remember  that  his  discipleship  did  not  fall  away  all  at  once. 
In  fact,  Jesus  gave  up  his  Galilean  work  rather  because  of  the  people's 
determined  political  attitude  toward  him  than  because  of  their 
abandonment  of  his  cause.  It,  however,  suggests  the  withdrawal  of 
the  delegation  itself  upon  the  conclusion  of  Jesus'  reply;  if  so,  it  is 
quite  likely  that  with  the  delegation  there  went  away  the  element  in 
the  crowd  which  sided  with  the  Pharisees  rather  than  with  Jesus;  so 
that  this  is  a  calling  around  him  of  the  element  that  sided  with  him- 
self, as  was  done  after  the  Beelzebul  charge  of  the  Jerusalem  scribes 
(cf.  3  :  22f.  and  notes  on  vs.  3if.).  In  this  case,  as  in  that,  he  puts  the 
truth  before  them  in  enigmatic  form  in  order  that  they  may  be  im- 
pelled to  think  upon  it  and,  through  the  discovery  of  its  meaning,  be 
more  deeply  impressed  by  it.  This  is  the  significance  of  his  call 
Hear  me  .  .  .  and  understand  (cf.  4  :  12;  7  :  18;  8  :  17,  21).  Noth- 
ing .  .  .  going  into  him  .  .  .  but  the  things  which  proceed  out  of 
the  man  .  .  .  defile  the  man:  This  is  practically  an  interpretation 

109 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

15.  understand:  there  is  nothing  from  without  the  man, 
that  going  into  him  can  defile  him;  but  the  things 
which  proceed  out  of  the  man  are  those  that  defile 

17.  the  man.^  And  when  he  was  entered  into  the  house 
from  the  multitude,  his  disciples  asked  of  him  the 

18.  parable.  And  he  saith  unto  them,  Are  ye  so  without 
imderstanding  also?  Perceive  ye  not,  that  whatsoever 
from  without  goeth  into  the  man,  it  cannot  defile  him; 

19.  because  it  goeth  not  into  his  heart,  but  into  his  belly, 
and  goeth  out  into  the  draught?    This  he  said,  making 

1  Many  MSB.  insert  ver.  16.     //  any  man  hath  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear. 

of  the  Law,  in  the  sense  of  the  statements  of  Matt.  5.  The  Law 
made  clear  distinctions  between  clean  and  unclean  food  (cf.  Lev.  11), 
to  which  the  requirement  of  hand  washing  before  meals  was  simply  an 
added  Pharisaic  ceremonial  refinement.  The  vital  matter,  however, 
was  the  moral  and  not  the  ceremonial  cleanness,  and  this  was  deter- 
mined, not  by  the  food  which  was  eaten,  much  less  by  the  formalities 
with  which  it  was  eaten,  but  by  the  expression  of  the  inward  character 
in  the  outward  life. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  ver.  16  is  omitted  from  the  text,  as  being  a 
later  addition,  and  that  Matthew  (15  :  3-14)  not  only  changes  the 
order  of  Jesus'  reply,  placing  more  logically  the  specific  counter 
charge  of  the  Pharisaic  transgression  of  the  Mosaic  law  (vs.  3-6)  be- 
fore the  general  denunciation  of  their  hypocrisy  (vs.  7-9),  but  pref- 
aces the  explanation  to  the  disciples  of  the  parabolic  remark  (ver.  lof.) 
with  a  statement  of  the  critical  stage  to  which  the  conflict  between 
his  spiritual  ministry  and  Pharisaic  ceremoniahsm  had  now  come 
(vs.  12-14).  This  is  likely  to  be  a  fuller  and  more  accurate  record  of 
Jesus'  remarks  than  that  given  us  by  Mark. 

17-23.  So  without  understanding:  Even  the  sympathetic  portion 
of  the  crowd  might  be  expected  to  come  slowly  to  a  comprehension 
of  the  deeper  truths  of  Jesus'  teaching;  but  the  disciples,  whose  sym- 
pathy of  ideas  was  nourished  by  constant  and  intimate  companion- 
ship, should  have  grasped  the  meaning  involved  in  such  a  simple 
statement  as  he  had  made.  The  food  which  is  eaten  does  not  enter 
into  the  man's  moral  and  rehgious  life,  but  into  his  physical  life, 
and  is  taken  care  of  by  its  natural  processes.  This  he  said,  making 
all  meats  clean:  This  is  an  interpretation  of  Jesus'  words  in  the  light 
of  such  controversies  as  arose  in  the  Apostolic  Age  (cf .  i  Cor.  6:12- 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

20.  all  meats  clean.    And  he  said,  That  which  proceedeth 

21.  out  of  the  man,  that  defileth  the  man.  For  from 
within,  out  of  the  heart  of  men,  ^  evil  thoughts  pro- 

22.  ceed,  fornications,  thefts,  murders,  adulteries,  covet- 
ings,  wickednesses,  deceit,  lasciviousness,  an  evil  eye, 

23.  railing,  pride,  foolishness:  all  these  evil  things  proceed 
from  within,  and  defile  the  man. 

2.  Period  of  Retirement  into  the  Regions  of  Tyre,  Sidon  and 
the  Decapolis,  7  ;  24-8  :  26 

24.  And  from  thence  he  arose,  and  went  away  into  the 
borders  of  Tyre  ^  and  Sidon.  And  he  entered  into 
a  house,  and  would  have  no  man  know  it;  and  he 

1  Grk.  thoughts  that  are  evil.  2  Some  MSS.  omit  and  Sidon. 

20;  ch.  8;  10  :  23-33;  Rom.  ch.  14;  cf.  also  Acts  10  :  15).  Covet- 
ings — not  to  be  confined  to  specific  infractions  of  the  Tenth  Com- 
mandment, but  extending  to  all  the  impulses  of  grasping  self-seeking. 
Wickednesses — not  bad  deeds  in  general,  but  acts  of  distinctively 
purposed  evil — malicious  wickedness  (cf.  Matt.  22  :  18).  Lascivious- 
ness— as  distinguished  from  the  particular  sins  of  adultery  and  for- 
nication, in  the  preceding  verse,  refers  to  the  general  conduct  of  a 
dissolute  Ufe  (cf.  Rom.  13  :  13).  An  evil  eye— more  than  mere  envy; 
rather  the  complement  of  the  covetous  self-seeking  mentioned  above — 
the  greed  that  seeks  not  only  to  have  more  than  is  right  from  others, 
but  begrudges  what  is  right  for  them  to  have  (cf.  Deut.  15:9;  Matt. 
20  :  15;  Jas.  5:4).  Railing — slander,  detraction  (cf.  3  :  28f  with 
Matt.  12  :32).  Pride — in  its  arrogancy,  as  was  specifically  seen  in 
the  Pharisaic  character  (cf.  Matt.  23:5-7,  12).  Foolishness — 
not  intellectual,  but  moral  obtuseness  (cf.  Lk.  12  :  20).  It  will  be 
seen  that  Matthew's  Hst  is  much  shorter  than  Mark's,  and  in  its 
summing  up  (Matt.  15  :  20)  aflfords  another  evidence  of  having  given 
us  altogether  more  accurately  the  Master's  remarks;  in  fact,  when  we 
compare  Mark's  list  with  those  in  Gal.  5  :  19-21;  Rom.  i  :  29-31; 
Eph.  4  :  19,  31;  5  :  3f.,  we  cannot  escape  the  feeling  that  it  was  in- 
fluenced by  the  sins  with  which  the  Apostolic  Church  in  its  Gentile 
mission  was  confronted  and  compelled  to  denounce. 

24.  He  arose  and  went  away:  The  external  reason  for  this  re- 
tirement lay  in  the  fact  that  the  populace  having  turned  away  from 

III 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

25.  could  not  be  hid.  But  straightway  a  woman,  whose 
little  daughter  had  an  unclean  spirit,  having  heard  of 

26.  him,  came  and  fell  down  at  his  feet.  Now  the  woman 
was  a  ^  Greek,  a  Syrophoenician  by  race.  And  she  be- 
sought him  that  he  would  cast  forth  the  demon  out  of 

27  her  daughter.  And  he  said  unto  her.  Let  the  children 
first  be  filled:  for  it  is  not  meet  to  take  the  children's 

28.  -  bread  and  cast  it  to  the  dogs.  But  she  answered 
and  saith  unto  him,  Yea,  Lord;  even  the  dogs  under 

1  Gentile,  or  pagan.  ^  loaf. 

him  after  his  spiritual  discourse  on  the  Bread  of  Life,  and  the  reU- 
gious  leaders  having  been  ahenated,  as  they  had  not  been  before, 
by  his  denunciation  of  ceremonialism  as  a  regulative  principle  in 
everyday  life  (see  notes  on  ver.  3f.),  there  was  nothing  left  for  him 
to  do  in  the  field  of  his  former  work.  The  deeper  reason,  however, 
lay  in  the  gravity  of  the  crisis  with  which  his  ministry  was  thus  con- 
fronted and  which  called,  not  merely  for  serious  reflection  as  to  his 
personal  future,  but  for  an  intimate  instruction  of  his  disciples,  in 
preparation  for  the  future,  as  it  concerned  their  relations  to  himself. 
In  view  of  this,  something  more  was  needed  than  a  mere  withdrawal 
across  the  Lake  for  rest  (cf.  6  :  31),  and  something  quite  different 
from  a  transfer  of  his  active  ministry  into  a  less  Jewish  region.  This 
was  essentially  a  period  of  retirement,  and  such  works  as  were  per- 
formed during  it  can  be  rightly  understood  only  when  they  are  seen 
practically  to  have  been  forced  upon  him  in  spite  of  his  purpose  to 
withdraw  from  all  activity.  The  following  statement  that  he  en- 
tered into  a  house  and  would  have  no  man  know  it  gives  essentially 
his  intention  for  the  entire  period,  the  significant  character  of  which 
is  all  the  more  evident  when  we  realize  that  it  was  immediately  pre- 
ceded by  the  visit  to  Jerusalem  recorded  in  the  fifth  chapter  of  John 
(cf.  Standard  Bible  Dictionary,  p.  438,  Note  i). 

(i)  The  Syrophcenician  Womajt,  vs.  25-30 

25-30.  Having  heard  of  him — not  necessarily  for  the  first  time. 
People  from  this  adjoining  land  had  been  attendant  upon  his  ministry 
before  the  choosing  of  the  Twelve  (3  :  8).  Indeed,  the  specifically 
Jewish  appeal  of  the  woman — "Thou  Son  of  David" — as  given  in 
Matthew  (15  :  22),  who,  in  this  incident,  reproduces  more  reUably 
the  Master's  words — may  have  been  due  to  the  fact  that  at  the  close 
of  the  second  preaching  tour  the  cure  of  the  Blind  and  Dumb  De- 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

29.  the  table  eat  of  the  children's  crumbs.  And  he  said 
unto  her,  For  this  saying  go  thy  way;  the  demon  is 

30.  gone  out  of  thy  daughter.  And  she  went  away  unto 
her  house,  and  found  the  child  laid  upon  the  bed, 
and  the  demon  gone  out. 

moniac  was  recognized  by  the  populace  as  attesting  Jesus  to  be  the 
Son  of  David  (Matt.  12  :  23).  This  would  not  necessarily  mean  that 
the  woman  had  accepted  the  Jewish  Messianic  hope,  or  that  she  had 
a  religious  faith  in  Jesus  as  the  Messiah  (cf.  case  of  the  Samaritan 
woman);  but  that  she  adopted  the  title  bestowed  upon  him  by  his 
countrymen  as  a  way  of  approach  to  him  in  her  need,  in  faith  that 
he  had  the  power  to  meet  the  need  (cf.  Matt.  15:31  for  the  general 
Gentile  attitude  of  mind  toward  the  religious  faiths  of  Judaism). 
A  Greek  by  speech,  but  a  Syrophoenician  by  race:  In  other  words, 
while  she  spoke  the  language  of  common  intercourse  in  the  East,  she 
belonged  to  that  branch  of  the  old  Phoenician  race  which,  migrating 
from  the  East,  had  settled  along  the  coast  and  in  Hellenistic  times  was 
called  Syrian,  in  distinction  from  the  Libyan  branch  in  North  Africa. 
The  Phoenicians  were  an  offshoot  of  the  Semitic  race,  belonging  to 
the  Canaanites  of  the  Old  Testament.  Matthew  calls  her  "a  Canaan- 
itish  woman"  (15  122).  Cast  forth  the  demon — not  necessarily 
at  a  distance  by  word  of  mouth,  but  most  probably  by  accompany- 
ing her  to  her  house  and  placing  his  hands  upon  the  sufferer.  This 
was  the  usual  mode  (cf.  5  :  23;  6  :  5).  Let  the  children  first  be  fed: 
According  to  Matthew's  fuller  record  (15  :  23-26),  he  at  first  took 
no  notice  of  the  woman's  plea,  and  when  the  disciples  apparently 
urged  him  to  grant  it,  so  that  she  would  stop  crying  after  them,  he 
laid  their  appeal  aside  with  the  reminder  that  he  was  sent  distinc- 
tively to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel;  it  was  only  when  she 
persisted  in  a  worshipful  hope  in  his  mercy  that  he  replied  to  her  at 
all,  and  then  merely  to  say — as  Mark  also  tells  us  in  the  following 
verse — that  the  children  of  the  Covenant  household  should  not  have 
their  rights  taken  from  them  and  given  to  others.  It  is  clear  from 
these  details  that  he  had  not  gone  into  this  region  to  continue  his 
active  ministry  among  a  non-Jewish  p)opulation  as  a  promise  of  the 
final  giving  of  the  Gospel  to  the  Gentiles.  His  personal  ministry  was 
to  God's  people  in  Israel.  It  was  distinctively  the  work  of  the  Mes- 
siah and  would  not  be  accomplished  until  the  Jewish  people  had 
acted  upon  it  as  such.  From  the  first,  doubtless,  there  was  involved 
in  Jesus'  insight  into  the  hostility  of  the  religious  leaders  to  his 
spiritual  claims,  a  consciousness,  not  only  of  the  inevitable  rejection 
of  himself  and  his  mission,  but  of  the  ultimate  acceptance  of  his  mis- 

113 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

31.  And  again  he  went  out  from  the  borders  of  Tyre, 
and  came  through  Sidon  unto  the  sea  of  Galilee, 

32.  through  the  midst  of  the  borders  of  Decapolis.    And 

sion  and  himself  by  those  outside  of  Israel  (cf.  Lk.  4  :  16-30;  Matt. 
8  :  I  if.)-  But  this  was  not  the  time  for  the  offer,  and  in  so  far  as  a 
ministry  in  this  Gentile  region  would  commit  him  to  such  an  offer, 
his  purpose  was  not  to  engage  in  it  (cf.  Matt.  10  :  5).  That  he  yielded 
here  to  this  woman's  plea  was  due  to  the  presence  in  it  of  a  genuine 
faith  which  could  not  be  denied.  Dogs  (Gr.  little  dogs) — evidently 
the  household  dogs,  which  were  fed  from  their  master's  table  (cf. 
following  verse  and  Homer,  II,  22  :  69;  23  :  173;  Od.  17  :  309).  This 
softened  the  reproach  of  the  reply,  though  it  made  no  less  clear  Jesus' 
attitude  of  mind  in  his  ministry  and  his  purpose  in  this  withdrawal 
from  Galilee.  Yea,  Lord;  even  (better,  and  yet)^  the  dogs  .  .  . 
eat  of  the  children's  crumbs:  She  admits  the  principle  which  he 
asserts,  but  turns  it  to  her  own  advantage  by  proclaiming,  not  so 
much  her  willingness  to  take  whatever  might  be  left  to  her  from  the 
service  of  the  children,  but  her  desperate  need,  which  would  not  be 
turned  aside  by  any  humiliation  of  racial  pride,  and  which  in  this 
self-abnegating  persistence  of  its  struggle  disclosed  a  trust  in  Jesus' 
power  to  heal  and  a  confidence  in  his  willingness  to  exert  his  power. 
For  this  saying — not,  of  course,  for  the  saying  itself,  but  for  the 
faith  involved  in  it. 

(2)  The  Deaf  and  Dumb  Man,  vs.  31-37 

31.  He  went  out  from  the  borders  of  Tyre:  Having  come  out  of 
Galilee  for  retirement,  the  performance  of  this  miracle  with  the  in- 
evitable gathering  of  the  populace  around  him  determined  Jesus  to 
leave  the  neighborhood  of  Tyre  for  other  regions  further  removed 
from  the  border  and  therefore  more  likely  to  give  him  the  settled 
retirement  he  needed.  Apparently,  he  first  went  northward  and  then, 
passing  on  his  way  through  Sidon,  turned  towards  the  East  and 
South  and  came  into  the  more  sparsely  settled  portions  of  the  De- 
capolis (a  region  mostly  East  of  the  Jordan,  dominated  by  ten  inde- 
pendent cities,  extending  from  Damascus,  on  the  North  to  Phila- 
delphia, on  the  South,  and  from  Kanata,  on  the  East  to  Scythopolis, 
on  the  West),  returning  later  to  the  Sea  of  Galilee.  It  was  impos- 
sible, however,  to  escape  the  crowds.  They  followed  him  from  place 
to  place  carrying  with  them  their  sick,  whom  they  cast  down  at  his 
feet  for  healing  (cf.  Matt.  15  :  3of.).  Of  these  heaUngs  and  their 
results,  Mark  gives  us  an  instance  in  the  following  verses. 

32-37.  An  impediment  in  his  speech  (Gr.  speaking  with  diffi- 
culty)— apparently  an  impairment  in  utterance  which  rendered  him 

114 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


they  bring  unto  him  one  that  was  deaf,  and  had  an 

impediment  in  his  speech;  and  they  beseech  him  to 

^T,.  lay  his  hand  upon  him.    And  he  took  him  aside  from 

the  multitude  privately,  and  put  his  fingers  into  his 

34.  ears,  and  he  spat,  and  touched  his  tongue;  and  looking 
up  to  heaven,  he  sighed,  and  saith  unto  him,  Ephpha- 

35.  tha,  that  is.  Be  opened.    And  his  ears  were  opened, 
and  the  bond  of  his  tongue  was  loosed,  and  he  spake 

practically  unable  to  communicate  his  ideas  through  speech  (cf. 
ver  35),  so  that  he  is  classed  among  the  dumb  (cf.  ver.  37).  Pri- 
vately (ht.  apart,  by  himself,  cf.  6  :  3if.).  The  drawmg  of  the  man 
aside  from  the  crowd  was,  not  merely  to  enable  him  to  concentrate 
his  attention  on  what  was  being  done  for  him,  but  to  avoid  any  un- 
necessary publicity  in  the  healing.  This  and  the  similar  case  of  the 
blmd  man  at  Bethsaida  (8  :  22-26)  afford  additional  evidence  that 
in  his  withdrawal  from  Galilee  the  Master's  purpose  was  not  to  con- 
tinue his  active  ministry  among  a  non-Jewish  people.  He  engaged 
in  no  pubHc  teaching.  His  activity  was  confined,  apparently,  to 
isolated  cases  of  healing,  concluding  with  a  feeding  of  the  multitude, 
and,  throughout  the  journey,  whatever  he  does  seems  to  have  the 
character  of  something  the  doing  of  which  he  could  not  escape  (cf. 
vs  24-26,  32;  8  :  2f.).  Put  his  fingers  into  his  ears  .  .  .  touched 
his  tongue:  The  unusual  actions  employed  by  the  Master,  especially 
when  compared  with  the  similar  actions  in  the  case  of  the  blind  man 
in  this  same  Decapolitan  region  (8  :  23),  seem  to  have  been  deter- 
mined by  the  religiously  ignorant  character  of  the  populace.  In  a 
specific  way  they  directed  attention  to  the  cure  which  was  to  be  made, 
and  to  this  degree  helped  the  patient  to  an  exercise  of  a  definite  trust 
in  him  who  was  effecting  it.  The  employment  of  spittle  was  m  ac- 
cordance with  its  recognized  use  as  a  remedial  agent,  and  thus  con- 
tributed to  the  patient's  confidence.  It  was  not  necessarily  applied 
directly  to  his  tongue,  but  most  probably  first  to  the  Master's  fingers. 
It  seems  to  have  been  otherwise  in  the  case  of  the  Bethsaida  blind 
man  (8  :  23;  cf.  however,  the  detailed  description  of  the  action  in 
the  case  of  the  Jerusalem  blind  man,  Jn.  9:6).  Sighed:  The  heaven- 
ward glance  and  the  deep-drawn  sigh  were  not  symbolic  encourage- 
ments to  the  patient's  faith,  but  personal  expressions  of  the  Master  s 
own  consciousness  of  the  source  of  the  healing  power  and  the  cause 
of  this,  as  of  all  maladies  to  be  cured.  His  perfect  communion  with 
God  gave  him  a  profound  sense  of  the  ravages  of  sin  over  the  physical, 
as  well  as  the  spiritual  world.    Burdened  as  he  always  was  with  this 

115 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

36.  plain.  And  he  charged  them  that  they  should  tell 
no  man:  but  the  more  he  charged  them,  so  much  the 

37.  more  a  great  deal  they  published  it.  And  they  were 
beyond  measure  astonished,  saying.  He  hath  done 
all  things  well;  he  maketh  even  the  deaf  to  hear,  and 
the  dumb  to  speak. 

8.      In  those  days,  when  there  was  again  a  great  multi- 
tude, and  they  had  nothing  to  eat,  he  called  unto 

fact  of  sin,  it  was  not  unnatural  that  he  should  give  expression  to  the 
consciousness  of  its  presence,  particularly  where  it  had  forced  itself 
into  the  friendships  of  life,  as  in  the  case  of  Lazarus  (Jn.  11  :4i), 
and  into  the  worship  and  service  of  the  covenant  people,  as  in  his 
lament  over  Jerusalem  (Lk.  13  134;  19  :4i),  and  here  in  the  case  of 
this  heathen  where  it  showed  its  sway  over  the  world  which  was  so 
ignorant  of  God.  Ephphatha — assimilated  from  the  Aramaic  ex- 
pression (Ethpathach),  used  doubtless  by  the  Master  and  preserved 
for  us  by  Mark  from  the  Apostolic  recitals  of  the  incident  (cf.  5  :  41; 
14  :  36).  It  is  addressed  to  the  ears,  as  the  organs  principally  affected. 
Plainly  (Gr.  straight,  rightly) — showing  that  he  had  not  been  entirely 
dumb,  but  only  inarticulate  in  his  speech.  Charged  them — not  only 
the  patient,  but  his  friends  (cf.  ver.  32),  in  order  that  no  publicity 
might  be  giv^en  to  the  cure  and  his  purpose  of  retirement  be  further 
hindered.  But  the  command,  though  apparently  repeatedly  given,  was 
ineffectual;  for  the  more  he  charged  them,  so  much  the  more  .  .  . 
they  published  it,  and  accompanied  their  excited  proclamation 
with  an  astonished  testimony  to  his  power  and  the  excellence  of  his 
deeds — a  result  very  different  from  that  which  followed  Jesus'  pre- 
vious miracle  in  this  region  (5  :  15-17). 

(j)  The  Feeding  of  the  Four  Thousand,  vs.  i-g 

8  : 1-9.  In  those  days — not  a  vague  expression  of  time,  indicat- 
ing an  uncertainty  as  to  when  the  event  took  place,  but  a  general 
term  used,  as  in  i  :  9,  to  connect  the  following  incident  somewhat 
loosely  with  the  foregoing  narrative.  It  is  obvious  that  the  gathering 
of  such  a  multitude  in  the  Master's  following  is  a  perfectly  natural 
development  of  the  preceding  incidents — not  that  the  events  were 
in  themselves  of  extraordinary  character,  but  that  the  region  was 
inhabited  by  a  people  to  whom  such  things  were  wholly  new  and 
of  superstitious  excitement,  and  who,  in  spite  of  all  the  Master's 
efforts  to  restrain  them,  had  enthusiastically  heralded  far  and  wide 
his  fame  as  a  wonder  worker.    In  the  thinly  settled  portions  of  the 

116 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

2.  him  his  disciples,  and  saith  unto  them,  I  have  com- 
passion on  the  multitude,  because  they  continue  with 

3.  me  now  three  days,  and  have  nothing  to  eat:  and  if  I 
send  them  away  fasting  to  their  homes,  they  will 
faint  on  the  way;  and  some  of  them  are  come  from  far. 

4.  And  his  disciples  answered  him,  Whence  shall  one 
be  able  to  fill  these  men  with  ^  bread  here  in  a  desert 

1  Grk.  loaves. 

Decapolis,  such  need  as  is  described  in  ver.  2  would  easily  occur,  and 
as  it  grew  would  make  more  certain  the  attachment  of  the  crowd 
to  him  they  followed,  as  their  only  likely  source  of  relief.  At  the 
first,  the  Master  had  doubtless  hoped  that  the  people  naturally,  as 
the  way  grew  hard  and  food  more  scarce  to  get,  would  disperse  of 
themselves;  but  as  he  found  the  days  increasing  and  his  course  draw- 
ing near  again  to  the  Sea  of  Galilee  and  coming  thus  out  into  more 
populated  regions,  he  realized  that,  not  only  for  the  sake  of  the  mul- 
titude, but  for  his  own  sake,  this  following  must  be  relieved  of  its 
need,  and  sent  back  to  the  country  from  which  it  had  come.  His 
compassion  is  for  the  people's  lack  of  food;  at  the  first  feeding  it  had 
been  for  their  lack  of  right  religious  leadership.  This  is  a  difference 
in  the  Master's  attitude  of  mind  towards  the  situation  which  agrees 
significantly  with  the  fact  that  on  the  former  occasion  the  multitude 
had  been  made  up  of  Jews,  whose  spiritual  condition  had  been  neg- 
lected by  their  religious  leaders;  here  it  was  composed  of  Gentiles, 
with  regard  to  whom  this  point  would  not  arise  (see  notes  on  6  :  34). 
Whence  ...  fill  these  men  with  bread?  It  seems  at  first  sight 
unaccountable  that  the  disciples  should  not  have  recalled  the  previous 
feeding  in  this  same  general  region,  and  answered  the  Master's  ques- 
tion with  a  challenge  to  him  to  repeat  his  wonder  work.  At  the  same 
time,  we  must  remember  (i)  that  the  disciples  had  not  been  much 
impressed  with  that  miracle  of  the  first  feeding,  as  far  as  it  showed 
the  Master's  care  for  them;  for  a  few  hours  later,  on  the  Lake,  the 
thought  of  this  care  was  the  last  thing  in  their  minds  (cf.  6  :  49-52; 
(2)  that  we  must  not  fail  to  consider  the  impression  made  upon  the 
disciples  by  the  collapse  of  the  Master's  work  and  his  forced  retire- 
ment from  Jewish  regions.  The  statement  after  the  address  which 
precipitated  that  collapse,  "To  whom  shall  we  go?  thou  hast  the  words 
of  eternal  life"  (Jn.  6  :  68),  was  not  so  much  a  confession  of  confi- 
dence as  a  confused  mixture  of  loyalty  to  him  and  depression  of  mind 
as  to  the  popular  revulsion  of  feeling  against  him.  This  confusion 
must  have  grown  with  the  Pentecost  visit  to  Jerusalem  (Jn.  5  :  i), 

117 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

5.  place?    And  he  asked  them,  How  many  loaves  have 

6.  ye?  And  they  said,  Seven.  And  he  commandeth 
the  multitude  to  sit  down  on  the  ground:  and  he  took 
the  seven  loaves,  and  having  given  thanks,  he  brake, 
and  gave  to  his  disciples,  to  set  before  them;  and  they 

7.  set  them  before  the  multitude.  And  they  had  a  few 
small  fishes:  and  having  blessed  them,  he  commanded 

8.  to  set  these  also  before  them.  And  they  ate,  and  were 
filled:  and  they  took  up,  of  broken  pieces  that  remained 

and  was  certainly  not  relieved  by  the  subsequent  necessity  of  leaving 
their  own  land  and  the  wandering  journey  through  these  heathen 
regions.  Here,  at  the  end  of  this  apparently  aimless  tour,  they  stand 
confronted  with  a  hungry  heathen  multitude  in  a  desert  place,  and 
the  Master  himself  has  nothing  definite  to  propose  for  their  relief. 
It  is  hardly  reasonable  to  expect  them  to  be  more  ready  to  think  of 
his  ability  to  provide  against  this  emergency  than  they  were  later 
when  he  warned  them  against  the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees  (ver.  15), 
and  they  were  thrown  into  consternation  about  their  lack  of  food, 
without  a  thought  of  his  power  to  supply  their  need.  Seven — as 
against  five  at  the  first  feeding.  A  few  small  fishes — as  against 
two  fishes  at  the  former  time.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  here  he  blesses 
the  fishes,  as  well  as  the  bread.  The  strict  Jewish  custom  of  bless- 
ing only  the  bread  seems  to  have  been  confined  to  the  first  occasion, 
with  its  Jewish  multitude.  Seven  baskets — of  a  soft  quality,  made 
of  plaited  reeds  or  cords,  sometimes  of  large  size,  as  in  the  case  of 
Saul's  escape  from  Damascus  (Acts  9  :  25).  At  the  former  feeding 
the  baskets  were  twelve  in  number,  and  of  stout  wickenvork.  About 
four  thousand — as  against  five  thousand  on  the  former  occasion. 
There  is  thus  a  varied  difference  in  these  details;  at  some  points 
the  figures  are  higher  at  the  second  feeding,  at  others  lower,  the 
incident  having  the  appearance  of  a  natural  occurrence,  and  not  of  a 
literary  restatement  of  the  former  event.  Dalmanutha:  This  is  a 
wholly  unidentified  locality.  Matthew  has  "Magadan"  (15  :  39). 
If  this  is  the  same  as  Magdala,  then  it  was  on  the  Western  shore  of 
the  Lake,  some  seven  miles  South  of  Gennesaret,  and  ver.  13  is  con- 
sistently a  return  to  the  Eastern  side,  bringing  them  to  Bethsaida 
(ver.  22).  In  any  event,  Mark's  record  places  this  feeding  near  the 
Lake,  which  the  crowd  could  not  cross  with  their  new  found  leader, 
making  the  situation  thus  one  in  which  the  Master  found  himself 
compelled  to  consider  the  sending  of  the  people  back  to  their  homes. 

118 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

9.  over,    seven   baskets.    And    they   were   about   four 

10.  thousand:  and  he  sent  them  away.  And  straightway 
he  entered  into  the  boat  with  his  disciples,  and  came 
into  the  parts  of  Dalmanutha. 

11.  And  the  Pharisees  came  forth,  and  began  to  ques- 
tion with  him,  seeking  of  him  a  sign  from  heaven, 

{4)  The  Pharisees'  Request  for  a  Sign,  vs.  10-13 

10-13.  The  Pharisees  came  forth  to  meet  him,  as  he  came  again 
to  the  Western  side  of  the  Lake,  and  began  to  enter  into  a  discus- 
sion with  him,  seeking  of  him  a  sign  from  heaven.  Their  motive 
in  seeking  a  sign  was  not  what  it  was  at  the  casting  out  of  the  dumb 
and  blind  demoniac — to  behttle  his  miraculous  power — but  for  the 
purpose  of  trying  him,  entrapping  him  into  a  further  unpopularity 
with  his  already  alienated  following.  Their  action  is  thus  based 
upon  the  defection  of  the  people  from  him,  and  the  sign  for  which  they 
ask  has  reference  to  the  coming  kingdom,  the  nearness  of  which  had 
been  the  specific  announcement  of  the  last  preaching  tour  (see  notes 
on  6  :  7).  The  suggestion  of  such  a  request  came,  doubtless,  from 
the  signs  announced  in  the  book  of  the  prophet  Joel  (2  :  3of.),  as 
harbingers  of  the  Messianic  Kingdom;  and  their  hope  was  that  he 
would  be  led  into  some  definition  or  designation  or  description  of 
that  kingdom  which  would  heighten  the  already  unpopular  idea  of 
its  spiritual  character  (cf.  Jn.  6  :  60-63).  Their  request  is  in  line 
with  their  later  and  more  definite  question:  "When  shall  the  king- 
dom of  God  come?"  (Lk.  17  :  20;  cf.  also  the  disciples'  question, 
Mk.  13  :  3f.  and  the  Master's  reply,  vs.  24-29,  and  Peter's  sermon, 
Acts  2  :  14-21).  This  would  be  all  the  more  evident  if  Matthew's 
elaboration  of  Jesus'  reply  (16  :  2b,  3)  were  part  of  the  text;  though 
even  its  interpolation  shows  the  early  understanding  as  to  what  the 
Pharisees  sought  in  their  request  (cf.  Lk.  12  :  54-56,  where  this 
statement  occurs  in  a  chapter  which  begins  with  a  warning  against 
the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees).  He  sighed  deeply  in  his  spirit— ex- 
pressive of  the  burden  which  rested  on  his  soul  through  his  profound 
realization  of  the  significance  of  their  wilful  and  persistent  hostility 
to  his  message  of  truth.  There  shall  no  sign  be  given:  According 
to  Mark,  Jesus  refuses  to  grant  their  request.  Matthew  less  ac- 
curately intimates  that  he  refers  them  to  the  sign  of  the  prophet 
Jonah,  as  in  the  request  after  the  casting  out  of  the  demoniac  (Matt. 
12  :  38-41).  The  reason  for  his  refusal  was  doubtless  because  he  did 
not  feel  the  time  had  come  for  it;  since  later,  on  the  way  to  Jerusalem, 
he  does  not  hesitate  to  lay  before  them  a  statement  as  to  the  spiritual 

119 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

12.  trying  him.  And  he  sighed  deeply  in  his  spirit,  and 
saith,  Why  doth  this  generation  seek  a  sign?  verily 
I  say  unto  you,  There  shall  no  sign  be  given  unto  this 

13.  generation.  And  he  left  them,  and  again  entering 
into  the  boat  departed  to  the  other  side. 

14.  And  they  forgot  to  take  bread;  and  they  had  not 

15.  in  the  boat  with  them  more  than  one  loaf.  And  he 
charged  them,  saying.  Take  heed,  beware  of  the  leaven 

16.  of  the  Pharisees  and  the  leaven  of  Herod.  And  they 
reasoned  one  with  another,  ^  saying,  ^  We  have  no 

1  Some  MSS.  read  because  they  had  no  bread.  ^It  is  because  we  have  no  bread. 

character  of  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  (Lk.  17  :  2of.).  To  the 
Other  side:  This  immediate  return  to  the  Eastern  side  of  the  Lake 
shows  that  he  must  have  come  over  from  it  in  order  to  get  free  of  the 
enthusiastic  multitude  which  had  been  swept  into  his  following  by 
the  kindly  miracles  he  had  been  forced  to  do;  since  a  mere  request 
from  the  Pharisees  for  a  sign  would  not  have  forced  him  back  into 
the  wilderness  regions  if  his  primary  object  in  going  there  had  been 
accompKshed.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  it  had  not  been  accom- 
pUshed.  He  had  not  been  able  to  get  the  retirement  for  which  he 
sought;  so,  on  his  return,  he  does  not  go  Northward,  as  before,  but 
in  a  northeasterly  direction  into  the  most  sparsely  settled  portion  of 
Philip's  tetrarchy  (vs.  22,  27). 

(5)  The  Warning  against  the  Leaven  of  the  Pharisees,  vs.  14-21 

14-21.  They  forgot  to  take  bread:  What  had  occasioned  this 
forgetfulness,  we  are  not  told.  It  may  have  been  the  immediacy  of 
their  return,  confused  as  it  must  have  been  by  the  controversy  which 
had  preceded  it.  The  leaven  of  the  Pharisees  and  ...  of  Herod: 
Leaven  here  is  not  what  Matthew  makes  it — "the  teaching  of  the 
Pharisees  and  Sadducees"  (16  :  12);  it  is  rather  the  attitude  of  mind, 
the  spirit,  which  rendered  the  Pharisees,  from  their  religious  point  of 
view,  and  Herod,  from  his  political  point  of  view,  hostile  to  him  and 
set  against  him.  Jesus  had  become  more  clearly  and  deeply  con- 
scious of  the  spirit  of  these  two  forces  since  the  last  preaching  tour, 
from  which  his  disciples  had  brought  him  reports  as  to  Herod's 
attitude  of  mind  (6  :  14-16),  and  since  his  visit  to  Jerusalem  at  the 
last  Feast  of  Pentecost,  where  he  had  seen  the  murderous  anger  of 
which  the  religious  leaders  were  capable  (Jn.  5  :  i7f.).    It  is  against 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


17 


bread.  And  Jesus  perceiving  it  saith  unto  them,  Why 
reason  ye,  because  ye  have  no  bread?  do  ye  not  yet 
perceive,   neither   understand?   have   ye   your   heart 

18.  hardened?    Having  eyes,  see  ye  not?  and  having  ears, 

19.  hear  ye  not?  and  do  ye  not  remember?  When  I  brake 
the  five  loaves  among  the  five  thousand,  how  many 
baskets  full  of  broken  pieces  took  ye  up?     They 


this  spirit  of  the  Pharisees  and  of  Herod  that  he  puts  the  discipleson 
their  guard.    His  warning  is  thus  a  preliminary  note  to  the  instruction 
which  he  feels  now  more  than  ever  is  a  vital  necessity  for  the  slow- 
minded  and  still  nationally  hopeful  disciples.    (See  the  persistency  of 
Seir  national  ideas  in  the  question  of  Acts  i  :  6.)    The  warning  may 
have  been  occasioned  by  the  discovery  that  they  had  with  them  but  a 
single  loaf  of  bread,  and  the  conversation  among  themselves  which 
would  naturally  follow;  but  the  reason  for  it  was  their  failure  to 
appreciate  the  significance  of  the  request  for  a  sign  and  his  refusal  of 
it     The  encounter  with  the  Pharisees  may  have  confused  them  into 
forgetring  to  take  with  them  sufficient  provision,  but  it  had  not 
opened  to  their  minds  what  it  portended  for  the  future.    They  were 
disturbed  by  it  as  showing  the  persistent  unreceptivity  of  the  Phar- 
isees to  their  Master's  teaching  and  work;  but  they  had  no  conception 
of  what  this  involved  of  the  hopeless  set  of  the  will  against  all  that 
this  teaching  and  work  stood  for  and  represented.     So  they  had 
failed  to  grasp  the  significance  of  the  incident,  and  were  now  con- 
cerned merely  with  the  fact  that  they  had  not  enough    ood.    Jesus 
wXtherefore,  draw  them  back  to  the  real  and  vital  thing  which 
shoild  occupy  their  minds-the  accumulating  ^^fP^  of/he  times 
as  bearing  upon  his  Ministry  and  his  own  life._    He  lets  the  bread 
o    which  they  are  doubtless  talking  suggest  his  phrase  of  leaven 
and  so  seeks  to  direct  their  attention  to  the  religious  and  political 
forces  which  are  gathering  against  himself  and  his  work.     They 
reasoned      .  .  we  have  no  bread:  This  warning  against  the  leaven 
of  the  Pharisees  and  of  Herod  could  not  have  suggested  to  them  as 
Orientals  so  concrete  a  thing  as  bread   unless  they  were  unnaturally 
occupied  with  the  thought  of  their  lack  of  food  and  had  wholly  failed 
to  understand  the  real  significance  of  the  Pharisees'  request  for  a  s^n^ 
The  first  idea  that  an  Oriental  would  have  had  of  leaven  as  related  to 
persons  was  the  moving  and  controlling  spirit  of  life  and  action  (as 
JesTs  himself  thought  of  it  (cf.  Lk.  12  :  i;  13  .21);  that  they  hmi  ed 
it  to  the  physical  idea  of  bread  shows  how  far  they  were  from  reahzing 
the  spiritual  things  with  which  their  Master's  ministry  was  con- 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

20.  say  unto  him,  Twelve.  And  when  the  seven  among 
the  four  thousand,  how  many  basketfuls  of  broken 
pieces  took  ye  up?    And  they  say  unto  him,  Seven. 

21.  And  he  said  unto  them,  Do  ye  not  yet  under- 
stand? 

22.  And  they  come  unto  Bethsaida.    And  they  bring 

cemed,  and  how  much  in  need  they  were  of  the  instruction  which  he 
was  planning  to  give  them.  Do  ye  not  yet  perceive,  neither  under- 
stand? This  rebuking  inquiry  does  not  refer  to  the  disciples'  failure 
to  perceive  and  understand  what  was  meant  by  the  leaven,  but  to  the 
lack  of  confidence  in  his  abiUty  to  provide  for  their  physical  needs, 
which  was  evidently  involved  in  their  interpretation  of  this  expression 
(see  vs.  19-21).  Apparently,  they  understood  his  warning  to  be 
against  supplying  their  shortage  by  the  purchase  of  some  sort  of 
undesirable  food.  But  why  should  they  think  that  the  Master  was 
in  any  way  concerned  about  their  provision  of  food,  when  they  had  so 
well  in  memory  the  recent  feedings  of  the  multitude?  Did  they  not 
understand  that  when  he  warned  them  against  the  leaven  of  the 
Pharisees  and  of  Herod  that  he  had  in  mind  something  which  affected 
them  far  more  personally  than  the  provision  of  bread?  It  is  clear 
that  we  have  here — just  as  really  as  in  the  case  of  the  second  feeding — 
a  hopeless  state  of  mind  on  the  disciples'  part  as  to  the  ability  of  the 
Master  to  provide  against  an  emergency  in  their  supply  of  food. 
Apparently,  the  second  miracle  had  left  no  greater  impression  upon 
them  than  the  first,  and  it  is  not  hard  to  understand  the  Master's 
disappointment,  not  so  much  at  their  inability  to  grasp  the  meaning 
of  his  words,  as  at  their  failure,  after  all  his  companionship  with  them 
and  all  his  varied  ministries  to  them,  to  have  a  confidence  in  his  care 
for  them.  If  they  were  to  be  prepared  against  the  coming  catastrophe 
in  his  work  and  life,  it  was  essential  that  they  should  trust  him  with 
the  supremest  questions  of  the  religious  hfe,  and  here  even  a  confidence 
in  his  care  for  them  in  ordinary  physical  things  was  lacking.  It  is  to 
be  noted  that  the  words  for  "baskets"  in  vs.  19  and  20  agree  with  the 
different  words  used  in  the  narratives  of  the  two  feedings  (see  notes 
on  V.  8). 

(6)  The  Healhtg  of  the  Bethsaida  Blind  Man,  vs.  22-26 

22-26.  Bethsaida:  For  the  identity  of  this  place,  see  notes  on 
6  :  45.  Took  hold  ...  by  the  hand  .  .  .  and  brought  him  out 
of  the  village:  For  the  significance  of  this  action,  see  notes  on  7  :  2>3' 
The  Master  was  returning  to  the  sparsely  settled  regions  on  the 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

to  him  a  blind  man,  and  beseech  him  to  touch  him. 

23.  And  he  took  hold  of  the  blind  man  by  the  hand,  and 
brought  him  out  of  the  village;  and  when  he  had  spit 
on  his  eyes,  and  laid  his  hands  upon  him,  he  asked 

24.  him,  Seest  thou  aught?  And  he  looked  up,  and  said, 
I   see   men;   for   I  behold   them  as   trees,   walking. 

25.  Then  again  he  laid  his  hands  upon  his  eyes;  and 
he   looked   stedfastly,   and   was   restored,   and   saw 

26.  all  things  clearly.  And  he  sent  him  away  to  his 
home,  saying,  Do  not  even  enter  into  the  village. 

East,  with  an  even  greater  sense  of  the  need  of  retirement  for  himself 
and  his  disciples  than  he  had  had  at  his  first  retirement  (see  notes 
on  7:24);  so  that  his  effort  at  privacy  in  this  case  of  healing  was 
more  elaborate  than  in  the  case  of  the  man  who  was  deaf  and  impotent 
in  his  speech.  Spit  on  his  eyes:  Apparently,  the  saliva  was  thrown 
directly  on  the  sightless  organs.  (But  see  notes  on  7  ^  33-)  Laid 
his  hands  upon  him — upon  his  eyes,  as  is  evident  from  ver.  25. 
Seest  thou  aught?  This  question  is  part  of  the  process  of  gradual 
healing  which  the  Master  adopted  in  this  case,  in  order  to  help  the 
religiously  slow-moving  Gentile  mind  to  an  adequate  faith  in  what 
he  was  doing.  I  behold  them  as  trees,  walking:  The  man  had  not 
been  bom  blind.  He  knew  how  men  looked,  and  he  knew  that  he  was 
not  seeing  them  as  they  really  were — in  size  and  general  outline,  the 
objects  he  saw  were  like  small  trees;  in  action  they  were  like  men. 
Looked  stedfastly  (lit.  to  see  through,  to  see  clearly,  as  m  Matt.  7:5): 
The  Revisers  have  confused  the  meaning  of  the  latter  part  of  this 
verse.  What  Mark  wishes  to  say  is  that,  after  the  second  touch  of  the 
Master's  hands,  the  man  saw— no  longer  with  a  confused  vision,  but 
clearly,  so  that  his  sight  was  fully  restored  and  he  was  able  to  look  at 
all  things  (not  he  saw),  even  though  they  were  faraway  (not  clearly). 
To  his  home— from  which  he  had  come  to  Bethsaida,  under  the 
guiding  of  companions.  Possibly,  he  may  have  been  brought  there 
by  them  specifically  to  secure  Jesus'  help,  as  the  news  of  his  presence 
again  at  the  Lake  had  been  spread  abroad,  through  such  an  event  as 
the  second  feeding  of  the  multitude,  which,  occurnng  as  it  did,  in  this 
same  general  region  East  of  the  Lake,  could  not  have  remained  an 
isolated  and  unknown  event.  Do  not  even  enter— final  evidence 
of  the  Master's  anxiety  that  the  news  of  such  healings  as  he  was 
compelled  to  perform  be  not  spread  abroad  and  his  further  effort  at 
retirement  be  frustrated. 

123 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

J.  The  Work  of  Instruction,  8  :  27-10  :  §2 

{A)  In  the  Decapolis 

27.  And  Jesus  went  forth,  and  his  disciples,  into  the  vil- 
lages of  Caesarea  Philippi:  and  on  the  way  he  asked 
his  disciples,  saying  unto  them.  Who  do  men  say  that 

(z)  The  Disciples^  Confession  oj  Jesus'  Messiahship,  8  :  27-g  :  1 

27.  Went  forth  .  .  .  into  the  villages  of  Csesarea  Philippi — 

a  city  in  the  tetrachy  of  Philip,  located  in  one  of  the  recesses  of 
Hermon,  near  the  sources  of  the  Jordan.  Its  earlier  name  was  Paneas 
(Josephus,  Antiq.  XVIII  :  2  :  i),  derived  from  a  grotto  dedicated  to 
Pan  (Antiq.  XV  :  10  :  3).  Philip  enlarged  and  refounded  the  older 
city,  calling  it  Caesarea,  in  honor  of  Augustus  (Josephus,  War, 
II  :  9  :  1),  and  adding  his  own  name,  to  distinguish  it  from  the 
Caesarea,  founded  by  his  Father  on  the  coast  (War,  III  :  9  :  7). 
The  course  followed  by  Jesus  and  his  disciples  from  Bethsaida  was 
most  probably  up  the  Jordan  Valley.  The  distance  was  only  some 
twenty-five  miles;  but  it  is  not  likely,  with  the  retirement  which  he 
sought  for  reflection  and  for  an  intimate  instruction  of  his  disciples, 
that  this  was  covered  in  any  but  a  most  leisurely  way.  Now,  however, 
as  he  approaches  the  villages  suburban  to  Caesarea,  he  seems  to  have 
felt  that  his  purpose  was  accomplished,  and  he  puts  to  them  the 
questions,  the  answer  to  which  will  show  with  what  success  the 
instruction  had  been  carried  on.  Who  do  men  say  that  I  am?  This 
was  preliminary  to  the  vital  question  of  ver.  29,  and,  together  with 
it,  discloses  the  character  of  the  instruction  he  had  given  them — a 
deeper  and  more  vital  acquainting  of  them  with  the  spiritual  nature 
of  his  work  and  of  himself.  It  would  seem  from  the  warning  with 
which  the  incident  of  the  leaven  opened  (ver.  15)  as  though  he  had 
intended  to  employ  this  time  of  seclusion  in  acquainting  them  with 
what  was  to  come  upon  his  work  and  himself  through  the  hostility 
of  his  enemies,  but  it  would  seem  from  the  rebuke  with  which  the 
incident  closed,  that,  owing  to  the  alarming  disclosure,  not  only  of 
their  lack  of  spiritual  insight  into  his  teaching,  but  of  their  lack  of 
practical  confidence  in  himself,  he  had  abandoned  that  subject  for 
this  other,  as  being  more  essential.  The  only  way  he  could  secure,  as, 
in  fact,  the  only  way  he  did  secure,  in  them  an  endurance  of  the 
coming  catastrophe,  was  by  bringing  them  into  a  vitally  spiritual 
fellowship  with  himself.  The  question  he  put  to  them  at  the  close  of 
the  Capernaum  address  shows  that  he  was  not  sure  whether  their 
national  ideas  would  let  them  accept  the  spiritual  nature  of  his 

124 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

28.  I  am?    And  they  told  him,  saying,  John  the  Baptist; 
and  others,  Elijah;  but  others,  One  of  the  prophets. 

29.  And  he  asked  them,  But  who  say  ye  that  I  am?    Peter 
answereth  and  saith  unto  him,  Thou  art  the  Christ. 

work  (Jn.  6  :  67) — just  as  he  had  hurried  them  away  from  the  na- 
tionally enthusiastic  crowd  after  the  first  feeding,  lest  they  be  caught 
in  the  poHtical  hysteria  (see  notes  on  6  :  45).  But  now  through  this 
period  of  retirement,  he  had  sought  to  bring  them  to  a  spiritual 
understanding  of  his  work  and  of  himself.  If  they  were  to  endure 
through  the  coming  disaster  in  an  abiding  confidence  in  himself, 
this  was  the  basis  for  all  that  he  would  have  to  disclose  to  them  of 
what  that  disaster  was  to  be.  The  startling  way  in  which  the  later 
announcement  of  the  Passion  came  to  the  disciples  shows  that  it 
could  not  have  been  the  subject  of  his  instruction  to  them  during  this 
time. 

28.  John  the  Baptist  ...  Elijah  .  .  .  One  of  the  prophets: 
This  shows  that  the  same  ideas  were  current  among  the  people  as 
during  the  last  Preaching  Tour  (cf.  6  :  i4f.).  At  that  time,  this  was 
all  the  people  thought  him  to  be,  and  though,  after  the  Feeding  of  the 
Five  Thousand,  the  multitude  was  ready  to  make  him  the  Messianic 
King,  his  determination  not  to  permit  this  to  be  and  his  refusal  in  the 
Capernaum  address  to  give  a  sign  of  his  Messiahship  brought  the 
people  back  to  these  same  ideas  of  him,  and  they  were  confirmed  in 
them  by  the  fact  that,  since  the  address  in  Capernaum,  the  Passover 
had  taken  place  and  Jesus  had  not  been  present  at  the  Feast  with 
any  claims  at  all.  Naturally,  the  people  said  he  might  be  a  prophet, 
but  he  was  not  the  Messiah — at' least  not  the  Messiah  for  whom  they 
looked.  Consequently,  the  disciples'  confession  of  the  Messiahship 
here  becomes  natural  and  normal  only  in  view  of  the  instruction  given 
them  by  the  Master — as  it  is  not  after  the  Walking  on  the  Water 
(Matt.  14  :  S3)  and  after  the  address  on  the  Bread  of  Life  (Jn.  6  :  69) 
and  yet  the  confession,  when  it  came,  was  an  inference  by  the  disciples 
from  the  spiritual  character  of  his  work  and  of  his  own  relation  to 
God  which  he  had  been  disclosing  to  them  in  this  instruction. 

29.  Who  say  ye  that  I  am?  The  significance  of  this  question 
rested  in  the  fact  that  the  disciples  might  have  come  to  realize  this 
spiritual  character  of  his  work  and  his  relation  to  God  and  yet  have 
hesitated  to  say  he  was  the  Messiah;  for  this  very  spiritual  character 
of  what  he  was  and  of  what  he  did  was  so  contrary  to  National  Ju- 
daism that  to  confess  him  to  be  the  Messiah  meant  a  vital  break  with 
all  the  religion  they  had  known.  They  had  recognized  his  wonderful 
goodness  to  the  needs  of  men;  they  had  come  through  this  instruc- 
tion to  understand  his  fellowship  with  themselves  in  the  needs  of 

125 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

30.  And  he  charged  them  that  they  should  tell  no  man  of 
him. 

31.  And  he  began  to  teach  them,  that  the  Son  of  man 
must  suffer  many  things,  and  be  rejected  by  the  elders, 
and  the  chief  priests,  and  the  scribes,  and  be  killed, 

their  own  hearts;  they  had  even  begun  to  see  something  of  his  spir- 
itual relations  with  God — but  all  these  things  might  be  and  yet  he 
be  only  a  supreme  teacher — a  holy  prophet  come  from  God.  To  con- 
fess that  he  was  the  National  Messiah  was  to  hold  themselves  Jews 
and  at  the  same  time  to  break  with  all  they  knew  of  Judaism.  Yet 
the  spiritual  impress  of  the  Master  upon  their  souls,  gathered  up 
and  intensified  during  this  period  of  instruction,  had  been  irresistible, 
and  when  this  challenge  came  to  them,  they  cast  all  their  hopes  and 
expectations  into  the  overflooding  loyalty  of  Peter's  answer.  Thou 
art  the  Christ.  Matthew's  addition  (16  :  17-19)  commends  itself 
as  naturally  a  part  of  this  incident;  for  the  Master's  unrestrained 
approval  is  what  we  would  expect,  in  view  of  the  critical  nature  of 
the  situation;  while  his  reference  to  the  Church  which  was  to  grow 
out  of  this  confession  accords  with  the  rupture  from  National  Judaism 
which  the  confession  involved,  and  his  reference  to  the  confession 
itself  as  brought  about  by  divine  revelation  presupposes  this  very 
spiritual  instruction  which  he  had  been  carrying  on  during  this  period. 
(See  Garvie,  Studies  in  the  Inner  Life  of  Jesus,  pp.  245-247.) 

30.  Tell  no  man  of  him:  Though  the  Twelve  were  convinced 
of  his  spiritual  Messiahship  and  had  asserted  their  belief,  even  at 
the  cost  of  breaking  with  National  Judaism,  they  were  in  no  con- 
dition to  instruct  and  persuade  the  multitude  who  had  already  de- 
liberately and  even  passionately  rejected  this  idea. 

31.  Began  to  teach  them — as  part  of  his  instruction,  made  pos- 
sible now  that  they  had  come  to  the  confession  of  the  spiritual  na- 
ture of  his  Messianic  work,  and  at  the  same  time  most  necessary; 
since,  being  Jews,  the  thought  of  suflfering  was  just  as  foreign  to 
their  conception  of  his  spiritual  Messiahship  as  it  had  been  to  all 
their  previous  idea  of  himself  and  his  work.  The  Son  of  Man:  Pos- 
sibly, this  title  was  used  instead  of  "the  Christ"  to  minimize  the 
resentment  with  which  the  announcement  of  suffering  would  be 
received.  The  elders  .  .  .  chief  priests  .  .  .  Scribes — the  three 
distinct  classes  of  which  the  Sanhedrin  was  composed.  If  Jesus 
was  to  be  rejected  at  all,  it  would  have  to  be  by  the  ecclesiastical 
rulers  and  not  by  the  Pharisees  as  a  party  among  the  people,  how- 
ever much  these  rulers  were  under  the  influence  of  that  Pharisaic 
ceremonialism  with  which  his  spiritual  mission  was  so  vitally  in  con- 

126 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


32.  and  after  three  days  rise  again.     And  he  spake  the 

saying  openly.     And  Peter  took  him,  and  began  to 

^^.  rebuke  him.     But  he  turning  about,  and  seeing  his 

flict.  This  he  had  known,  in  a  way,  from  the  beginning  of  his  min- 
istry (see  notes  on  2  :  12,  19;  cf.  also  Jn.  2  :  19),  but  he  had  reahzed 
it  with  convincing  force  in  his  recent  visit  to  Jerusalem  at  Pentecost 
(cf  Jn.  5  :  16-18;  7  :  19-24).  Be  killed:  There  is  no  reference  here 
to  the  kind  of  death  he  was  to  die.  Like  the  earlier  statement  of  the 
end  awaiting  him  (2  :  20;  Mt.  12  140;  Jn.  2  :  19),  it  is  general  and 
is  not  defined  by  the  details  which  may  have  become  evident  to  him 
only  at  the  last.  After  three  days  rise  again:  The  inclusion  of  this 
reference  to  the  resurrection  in  the  announcement  of  his  Passion 
must  have  been  due  to  his  consciousness  of  his  vital  relationship 
to  the  ever  living  God.  There  was  nothing  in  the  attitude  of  the 
people  or  of  the  rulers  to  suggest  this  to  him  now,  any  more  than 
there  had  been  at  the  beginning  of  his  ministry  (cf.  Jn.  2  :  19),  or 
during  its  progress  (cf.  Matt.  12  :  40).  This  Markan  phrase,  after 
three  days"  {i.e.  in  a  short  time)— also  used  in  9  :  31;  10  ^  34— is 
on  the  face  of  it  prmiary  as  over  against  the  more  formal  phrase, 
"on  the  third  day,"  used  by  Matthew  and  Luke  (cf.  also  Acts  10  :  40; 

32.  Openly  (lit.  unreservedly,  plainly,  i.e.  in  unmistakable  terms, 
as  against  his  earlier  enigmatic  references  to  the  event,  cf.  2  :  20; 
Jn.  2  :  19;  3  :  i4f.;  6  :  51-56;  Matt.  12  :  40).  Took  him— aside, 
from  the  rest  of  the  Twelve,  as  though  privately  to  remonstrate  with 
him  against  such  an  impossible  idea.  To  rebuke  him:  The  disciples 
acceptance  of  the  spiritual  character  of  the  Master's  work  was  at 
most  a  change  from  a  political  to  a  spiritual  conception  of  what  he 
was  to  do  for  Judaism  and,  through  Judaism,  for  the  world.  ^ either 
NaUonalism  nor  Ceremoniahsm  was  wholly  gone  from  their  Mes- 
sianic ideas  (cf.  Acts  i  :  6;  10  : 9-16;  Gal.  2  :  11-14);  while  the  suf- 
fering of  the  Messiah  was  completely  at  variance  with  them.  As 
they  saw  it,  the  Messiah  must  triumph  spiritually,  if  not  politically, 
and  spiritual  triumph  did  not  involve  in  its  processes,  any  more 
than  in  its  results,  the  element  of  suffering.  Consequently,  when 
this  announcement  of  the  Passion  was  made,  the  statement  of  the 
Death  overwhelmed  and  put  out  of  thought  the  statement  of  the 
Resurrection  (cf.  Jn.  20:1-9;  Lk.  24:10-12).  The  passionate 
emotion  of  Peter's  resentment  is  more  clearly  preserved  in  Matthew  s 
record:  "Be  it  far  from  thee  (lit.  God  have  mercy  on  thee),  Lord: 
this  shall  never  be  unto  thee"  (16  :  22f.).  ^    ,  .    .  u 

7,7,    Satan— not  as  giving  Peter  an  evil  name,  as  he  had  just  be- 
fore given  him  a  noble  one  (Matt.  16  :  18),  but  as  recogmzmg  the 

127 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

disciples,  rebuked  Peter,  and  saith,  Get  thee  behind 
me,  Satan;  for  thou  mindest  not  the  things  of  God, 

34.  but  the  things  of  men.  And  he  called  unto  him  the 
multitude  with  his  disciples,  and  said  unto  them.  If 
any  man  would  come  after  me,  let  him  deny  himself, 

35.  and  take  up  his  cross,  and  follow  me.  For  whosoever 
would  save  his  life  shall  lose  it;  and  whosoever  shall 
lose  his  life  for  my  sake  and  the  gospel's  shall  save  it. 

Satanic  element  of  temptation  in  Peter's  remonstrance  against  the 
course  to  which  he  had  committed  himself.  Mindest  not  (lit.  think- 
est  not,  regardest  not)  the  things  of  God :  Peter  did  not  look  at  things 
as  God  looked  at  them.  This  was  the  fundamental  difficulty.  Con- 
sequently, he  could  see  no  reason  why  such  a  death  should  enter  into 
the  Master's  future  course;  he  could  not  appreciate  nor  understand 
the  element  of  self-sacrifice  in  the  work  of  the  Messiah.  He  looked 
at  things  as  men  looked  at  them,  from  the  viewpoint  of  self-interest 
and  self-regard,  so  that  the  Master's  statement  was  to  him  the  an- 
nouncement of  an  impossible  course  of  action  for  any  one  to  take, 
whether  Messiah  or  not. 

34-9  :  I .  The  multitude :  The  presence  of  a  crowd  which  required 
any  such  instruction  as  is  contained  in  the  following  discourse  is 
so  out  of  keeping  with  the  surroundings  in  which  Jesus  and  his  dis- 
ciples find  themselves  that  we  can  only  think,  either  of  these  words 
as  having  been  delivered  at  some  other  time,  as  for  example  on  the 
way  to  Jerusalem  in  some  such  circumstances  as  are  indicated  by 
Luke  for  similar  remarks  (12  '.4.-21;  or  14  :  25-27;  or  17  :  20-37), 
or — which  is  more  probable — of  Matthew's  record  as  being  primary 
and  the  discourse  as  having  been  delivered  at  this  time  specifically 
to  the  disciples  (Matt.  16  :  24).  In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  dis- 
ciples did  not  understand  the  need  of  suffering  in  connection  with 
the  spiritual  ministry  of  the  Messiah,  it  would  seem  only  natural 
that  he  should  follow  up  his  rebuke  of  Peter  with  an  enlargement 
upon  the  idea  of  the  necessity  of  suffering  for  the  disciples  as  well 
as  for  himself.  Take  up  his  cross:  This  figure  is  not  used  by  the 
Master  with  any  specific  reference  to  the  mode  of  his  coming  death. 
The  process  of  crucifixion,  by  which  the  condemned  criminal  carried 
on  his  shoulders  the  instrument  of  his  execution,  was  a  matter  of 
cornmon  knowledge,  and  reference  is  made  to  it  here  in  general,  as  indi- 
cating the  limit  to  which  the  denying,  i.e.  the  ignoring  of  oneself  was  to 
go— the  limit  of  giving  up  life  itself.  And  (lit.  and  so)  follow  me: 
This  is  not  added  as  a  third  requirement,  but  as  gathering  upthecondi- 

128 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


36.  For  what  doth  it  profit  a  man,  to  gain  the  whole  world, 

37.  and  forfeit  his  life?    For  what  should  a  man  give  in 
^S.  exchange  for  his  life?    For  whosoever  shall  be  ashamed 

of  me  and  of  my  words  in  this  adulterous  and  sinful 
generation,  the  Son  of  man  also  shall  be  ashamed  of 
him,  when  he  cometh  in  the  glory  of  his  Father  with 
the  holy  angels. 


tional  statement  of  the  preceding  verse  and  showing  how  it  was  fulfilled 
only  by  the  ignoring  of  self.    Would  save  his  life— his  physical  life,  by 
refusing  to  ignore  himself  to  the  hmit  of  giving  it  up,  even  unto  death. 
Shall  lose  it— the  spiritual  life— the  life  which  comes  from  sacnficing 
the  lower  interests  of  one's  physical  and  personal  life  for  the  higher 
and  nobler  interests  that  lie  outside  of  it  and  are  gathered  up  ideally 
in  the  service  of  God— or,  as  the  Master  puts  it  in  the  converse  state- 
ment: whosoever  shall  lose— ignore,  sacrifice— his  lower,  physical, 
personal  life  for  my  sake  and  the  Gospel's  shall  save  it.    The  pe- 
cuhar  Markan  addition,  "and  the  Gospel's,"  is  most  hkely  taken 
from  the  later  form  into  which  the  Master's  words  had  been  cast 
in  the  Apostolic  preaching  (see  notes  on  i  :  4)  or  may  be  the  work  of 
an  Editor,  as  in  10  :  29.    Gain  the  whole  world  and  forfeit  {t.e. 
lose  as  a  penalty)  his  life:  The  soul  finds  its  life,  not  in  having  pos- 
sessions, but  in  being  in  fellowship  with  God.     Consequently,  to 
absorb  oneself  in  getting  gain  is  to  minister  to  the  soul  the  things  on 
which  it  cannot  live.    The  penalty  is  the  loss  of  its  life  (cf.  Lk.  12  : 
16-20;  also  Phil.  3  :  yf-;  Matt.  4  : 8).    In  exchange  for  his  life- 
after  it  is  lost,  in  order  to  get  it  back.    For— confirming  the  hope- 
lessness of  this  loss  of  the  soul's  life  by  the  attitude  which  Chnst 
himself  must  take  at  the  final  consummarion  of  his  kingdom  toward 
the  spirit  which  prompted  such  living.    Ashamed  of  nie  and  my 
words— not  simply  lacking  in  moral  courage  to  identify  himself 
with  Christ  and  his  teaching,  but  without  moral    responsiveness 
towards  his  truth  or  personal  responsiveness  towards  his  self.    Adul- 
terous—the old  propheric  phraseology  for  expressing  apostasy  from 
Jehovah  (cf.  Hos.   2:2-13;  Ezek.   16:1-22).     Son  of  man  ... 
be  ashamed— not  merely  lacking  in  personal  accord  and  fellowship 
with  him,  but  expressing  this  in  a  positive  disownmg  of  all  relations 
between  him  and  himself  (cf.  Matt.  10  :  33  =Lk.  12  :  9).    Glory  of 
his  Father:  His  triumph  is  to  realize  itself  in  the  manifestation  ot 
the  glory  of  the  Divine  presence,  rather  than  in  the  display  of  the 
pomp  of  an  earthly  kingdom.    With  the  holy  angels— as  mmisters 
of  his  rule  (cf.  13  :  27;  2  Thess.  i  :  7;  Heb.  i  :  14).    See  the  kmg- 

129 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

9.  And  he  said  unto  them,  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  There 
are  some  here  of  them  that  stand  by,  who  shall  in  no 
wise  taste  of  death,  till  they  see  the  kingdom  of  God 
come  with  power. 

2.  And  after  six  days  Jesus  taketh  with  him  Peter,  and 
^  James,  and  John,  and  bringeth  them  up  into  a  high 
mountain  apart  by  themselves:  and  he  was  trans- 

3.  figured  before  them;  and  his  garments  became  glister- 

1  Jacob. 

dom  of  God  come  with  power:  This  cannot  refer  to  the  witness  which 
three  of  the  disciples  had  of  the  following  transfiguration;  though 
those  who  divided  this  Gospel  into  chapter  and  verse  evidently  so 
intended  it  to  be  understood  by  distinctly  connecting  the  statement 
with  the  record  of  this  event,  in  spite  of  their  failure  to  do  so  in  Mat- 
thew's Gospel  (cf.  Matt.  16  :  28).  It  refers  to  the  coming  of  the 
kingdom  in  spiritual  power,  as  it  was  estabhshed  in  the  hearts  of 
men  throughout  the  Apostolic  age.  This  would  be  in  accord  with 
the  spiritual  idea  of  himself  and  his  mission  which  he  had  been  bring- 
ing home  to  the  disciples  in  his  instruction.  This  spiritual  com- 
ing of  the  kingdom  is  thus  preparatory  to  that  personal  coming  of 
the  Son  of  Man  referred  to  in  the  preceding  verse,  which  marks  the 
kingdom's  consummation. 

(2)  The  Transfiguration,  g  :  2-13 

2,  3.  After  six  days — Luke  less  definitely  and  accurately,  "about 
eight  days  after"  (cf.  similar  indefiniteness  in  Luke's  statement  of 
figures,  3  :  23;  9  :  14;  22  :  59).  Peter  and  James  and  John:  so  far, 
these  three  disciples  had  been  favored  with  a  participation  in  the 
private  experiences  of  the  Master's  ministry  only  at  the  raising  of 
Jairus'  daughter  (5  :  37).  A  high  mountain — one  of  the  southern 
spurs  of  Hermon,  in  whose  neighborhood  they  were  (see  notes  on 
8  :  27).  Apart  by  themselves:  In  view  of  their  need  of  further  in- 
struction as  to  his  Passion  and  their  own  suffering  as  his  disciples,  it 
was  quite  natural  that,  before  he  should  come  again  into  the  pubhc 
work  that  must  turn  his  face  finally  towards  Jerusalem,  he  should 
wish  to  have  close  and  intimate  converse  with  them  about  the  future. 
Transfigured  (lit.  transformed,  cf.  2  Cor.  3  :  18):  After  the  talk 
together,  the  Master  doubtless  drew  apart  for  personal  prayer  (cf. 
Lk.  9  :  28),  his  mind  filled  with  thoughts  which,  however  burdened 
with  the  inevitable  outcome  of  his  earthly  ministry,  must  have  been 

130 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

ing,  exceeding  white,  so  as  no  fuller  on  earth  can  whiten 

4.  them.     And  there  appeared  unto  them  Ehjah  with 

5.  Moses:  and  they  were  talking  with  Jesus.  And  Peter 
answereth  and  saith  to  Jesus,  Rabbi,  it  is  good  for 
us  to  be  here:  and  let  us  make  three  tabernacles; 
one  for  thee,  and  one  for  Moses,  and  one  for  Elijah. 

6.  For  he  knew  not  what  to  answer;  for  they  became  sore 

dominated  with  his  consciousness  of  vital  communion  with  God,  of 
his  personal  relation  to  the  Unseen  World,  and  of  the  final  triumph  of 
his  work — the  triumph  of  it,  not  as  a  Cause,  but  as  the  realization  of 
his  divine  claims  on  the  faith  and  obedience  of  humanity.  He  would 
thus  be  not  only  receptive  to  the  coming  of  the  heavenly  visitants  and 
their  converse  with  him  on  the  tragic  events  which  lay  before  him 
(cf.  Lk.  9  :  31),  but  would  be  filled  anew  with  the  glory  of  its  results. 
This  was  the  real  transformation  which  took  place  and  which  must 
have  shown  itself  essentially  in  the  glorified  transforming  of  his 
countenance  (cf.  Matt.  17:2;  Lk.  9  :  29;  cf.  also  Ex.  34  :  29;  Acts 
6  :  15).  This  all  took  place  before  them,  i.e.  in  their  full  sight,  and 
as  they  watched,  it  seemed  as  though  the  glory  of  his  exultant  inner 
self  overflowed  upon  his  very  garments,  until  they  became  glister- 
ing— flashing  like  burnished  brass,  or  steel  (Nah.  3  13),  or  gold  (i 
Esdras  8  :  57),  or  like  fire  (i  Mace.  6  :39).  Exceeding  white — 
Matthew  says  "white  as  the  light";  Luke,  "white  and  dazzling" 
(better  dazzling  white).  So  as  no  fuller  on  earth  can  whiten 
them  (lit  such  [garments]  as  a  fuller  on  the  earth  is  not  able  so  to  whiten 
[them]). 

4.  There  appeared  unto  them:  This  was  as  real  an  experience  to 
the  disciples  as  it  was  to  the  Master.  Such  foreboding  thoughts  as 
they  had  made  them  receptive  to  it,  not  in  the  way  of  a  self-suggested 
dream — which  would  have  been  a  gloomy  and  not  a  glorious  one — but 
in  appreciation  of  its  ofi"setting  of  their  fears  for  the  future.  Elijah 
with  Moses:  Elijah  was  in  the  thoughts  of  the  people  generally  as  one 
who  was  to  return  to  earth  as  the  herald  of  the  Nation's  Messiah, 
This  conversation  with  the  Master  was  not  a  role  expected  of  him; 
while  Moses  was  not  looked  for  at  all.  As  far,  however,  as  they 
represented  the  Old  Testament  dispensation,  their  presence  was  an 
assurance  to  the  disciples — as  it  was  supremely  to  the  Master — that 
whatever  of  suffering  there  might  be  in  the  future  for  him,  the  glory 
of  the  kingdom  would  not  be  lost,  but  would  be  identified  with  the 
glory  of  his  personal  life. 

5,  6.  Answereth — not  to  anything  that  had  been  said,  but  to  what 

131 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

7.  afraid.  And  there  came  a  cloud  overshadowing  them: 
and  there  came  a  voice  out  of  the  cloud,  This  is  my 

8.  beloved  Son:  hear  ye  him.  And  suddenly  looking 
round  about,  they  saw  no  one  any  more,  save  Jesus 
only  with  themselves. 

had  occurred.  Luke  adds  that  his  remarks  were  made  as  the 
Heavenly  Visitants  were  departing  from  them  (9  iss).  It  is  good 
for  us  to  be  here  (lit.  It  is  good  that  we  are  here) — not  in  the  sense  of 
being  pleasant  for  them,  but  opportune  that  they  can  be  of  service 
in  the  way  he  is  about  to  suggest.  Tabernacles — booths — doubtless, 
to  retain  the  Visitants  and,  in  the  joyous  spirit  of  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
nacles, to  express  the  rapture  aroused  by  their  presence.  It  was  a 
confused  mixture  of  purpose,  impulsively  formed,  and  without  ra- 
tional adjustment  to  the  situation;  for  he  knew  not  what  to  answer. 
They  had  all  become  sore  afraid:  It  was  not  only  an  unusual,  but 
an  unnatural  experience  which,  by  its  very  reality,  dazed  them  and 
made  it  difficult  for  their  minds  to  work  in  an  orderly  way. 

7,  8.  A  cloud — the  usual  S3anbol  of  the  Divine  Presence  in  the 
Old  Testament  theophanies  (cf.  Ex.  16  :  10;  19  :  9,  16;  24  :  isf.; 
33  :  9;  Lev.  16  :  2;  Num.  11  :  25).  According  to  Matthew,  it  was 
"bright";  so  that  the  fear  which  they  experienced  (cf.  Lk.  9  :  34) 
when  it  came  overshadowing  them  (the  disciples  as  well  as  the  Master 
and  his  Visitants)  was  not  one  of  depression  from  the  murky  darkness 
of  an  enveloping  mist,  but  one  of  awe  from  the  unnatural  brightness 
of  an  overflooding  glory,  like  that  which  rested  upon  and  filled  the 
Tabernacle  (Ex.  40  :  35;  cf.  also  2  Pet.  1:17).  A  voice — intended 
to  express,  in  what  it  uttered,  the  Divine  approval  of  Jesus'  renewed 
commitment  of  himself  to  his  work  in  face  of  the  tragic  development 
which  it  presented.  So  had  Jesus'  initial  commitment  of  himself  to 
his  work  been  approved  at  the  Baptism  (see  notes  on  i  :  11).  My 
beloved  Son:  Mark  and  Matthew  reproduce  the  title  as  given  at  the 
Baptism:  Luke  changes  it  to  "chosen"  (cf.  Isa.  42  :  i).  None  of 
them  add  the  Baptism  phrase,  "in  whom  I  am  well  pleased"  (which, 
however,  is  given  in  2  Pet.  i  :  1 7) ;  instead,  they  unite  in  recording  an 
altogether  different  phrase  as  having  been  uttered,  hear  ye  him. 
This  was  in  keeping  with  the  presence  of  Moses,  who  had  foretold  of 
a  prophet  God  was  to  raise  up,  to  whom  they  were  to  hearken  (Deut. 
18  :  15,  i8f.).  This  prophet  was  identified  with  the  Messiah  (cf. 
Jn.  I  :  21,  45;  Acts  3  :  22).  Matthew  adds  that  it  was  when  they 
heard  this  voice  they  were  seized  with  fear,  from  which  they  were 
recovered  only  by  Jesus'  kindly  touch  and  reassuring  words  (17  :  6f.). 
Suddenly  looking  roimd  about:  Doubtless,  the  luminous  glory,  be- 

132 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


9.      And  as  they  were  coming  down  from  the  mountain, 

he  charged  them  that  they  should  tell  no  man  what 

things  they  had  seen,  save  when  the  Son  of  man  should 

10.  have  risen  again  from  the  dead.    And  they  kept  the 

saying,  questioning  among  themselves  what  the  rising 

fore  which  Matthew  says  they  fell  on  their  faces  (17  :  6),  had  dazzled 
as  well  as  dazed  them.  When,  at  the  Master's  words,  they  arose  and 
looked  about  them,  they  found  themselves  alone  with  him.  It  is 
easy  to  see  why  this  experience  on  the  Mount  made  upon  the  disciples 
a  lasting  impression  (cf.  not  only  2  Pet.  i  :  lyf-,  but  also  Jn.  i  :  14). 
It  more  than  confirmed  their  recent  acceptance  of  their  Master's 
spiritual  Messiahship  as  over  against  the  Nationalism  of  the  Rulers, 
and  strangely  illumined  the  words  with  which  the  Master  had  ap- 
proved Peter's  confession,  when  he  told  him  it  was  a  revelation  to  him 
from  God  himself;  while  at  the  same  time  it  attached  a  solemn 
certainty  to  the  distressing  announcement  the  Master  himself  had 
made  of  his  suffering,  rejection  and  death  which  made  it  difficult  for 
them  again  to  gainsay  it,  whether  they  understood  its  reason  and 
significance  or  not.  (For  the  psychology  of  the  Transfiguration  see 
Ch.  XVIII  of  Garvie's  Studies  in  tlie  Inner  Life  of  Jesus.) 

9,  10.  Coming  down— the  next  morning,  as  Luke's  record  would 
imply  (9  :  37).  Tell  no  man:  This  charge  to  silence,  like  the  previous 
one  regarding  his  Messiahship,  was  simply  because  those  who  had  not 
reached  their  spiritual  conception  of  his  Messiahship  would  not  only 
fail  to  understand  what  they  had  seen,  but  would  be  sure  to  miscon- 
strue it  in  the  interests  of  their  polidcal  hopes.  When  the  Son  of 
Man  had  risen  again  from  the  dead,  all  danger  of  precipitatmg  the 
crisis  of  his  mission  would  be  past,  and  this  experience  they  had  had 
would  then  be  confirmatory  of  their  message  to  the  worid  of  his 
Divine  Messiahship.  Luke  does  not  record  this  command,  though  he 
implies  it  in  his  statement  of  9  :  36.  They  kept  the  saying  (lit.  luid 
hold  of,  seized,  held  /as/)— as  something  they  could  not  let  go.  Ques- 
tioning .  .  .  what  the  rising  .  .  .  from  the  dead  should  mean: 
Though  the  Master,  just  a  few  days  before,  had  announced  his  Resur- 
rection as  well  as  his  Passion,  the  former  element  had  been  so  over- 
shadowed by  the  latter  that  it  had  made  little  or  no  impression  upon 
them  (cf.  8  :  31-33).  If  they  had  thought  of  it  at  all,  it  was  probably 
only  as  an  event  which  was  to  occur  in  connection  with  the  general 
Resurrection  at  the  last  day— this  great  consummation  coming  to 
pass  perhaps  a  little  sooner  because  of  the  Passion.  Now,  however, 
the  Master's  announcement  is  confined  to  his  Resurrection,  and  it 
takes  hold  of  all  their  thinking  as  something  which  is  to  occur  apart 

133 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

11.  again  from  the  dead  should  mean.  And  they  asked 
him,  saying,  ^  How  is  it  that  the  scribes  say  that 

12.  EHjah  must  first  come?  And  he  said  im to  them,  Elijah 
indeed  cometh  first,  and  restoreth  all  things :  and  how 
is  it  written  of  the  Son  of  man,  that  he  should  suffer 

1  The  scribes  say. 

from  the  general  Resurrection  definitely  and  distinctly,  in  their  own 
lifetime  and  that  probably  before  long,  and  they  were  utterly  con- 
fused as  to  what  it  could  mean. 

11-13.  But  behind  this  confusion  lay  another  and  more  funda- 
mental perplexity.  In  their  experience  on  the  Mount  they  had  been 
conscious  of  the  presence  of  Elijah.  Now  the  Scribes  taught — and 
the  Scripture  itself  supported  their  teaching  (cf.  Mai.  4  :  5f.) — that 
Elijah  must  first  come,  to  prepare  the  people  for  the  ushering  in  of 
the  Messianic  era.  They  had  witnessed,  indeed,  the  presence  of 
Elijah,  but  not  in  any  activity  among  the  people  to  prepare  them  for 
the  JMessiah,  on  the  contrary,  secluded  from  the  people,  for  the  pur- 
pose only  of  converse  with  the  Messiah  himself.  If,  as  the  Master 
had  impressed  upon  them,  his  own  work  was  almost  finished,  how  was 
the  preparation  for  it,  taught  by  the  Scribes  and  foretold  by  Scripture, 
to  be  understood?  It  was  a  perfectly  natural  perplexity,  but  one 
which  would  not  have  been  present  in  their  minds  had  they  appre- 
ciated the  service  rendered  to  the  Master  by  him  who  had  been  their 
master  before  they  had  transferred  their  discipleship  to  Jesus.  So 
Jesus  shows  them  that  the  function  assigned  by  Scripture  and  the 
Scribes  to  Elijah  had  been  already  performed  by  the  Baptist,  only  that 
their  expectation  as  to  what  would  result  from  this  preparation  by 
Elijah  had  left  out  of  account  the  spiritual  character  of  the  Baptist's 
ministry  and  the  necessary  hostility  to  it  on  the  part  of  those  who  had 
no  spiritual  receptivity  to  its  message.  Elijah  indeed  cometh  first 
and  restoreth  all  things — the  Scriptures  and  the  Scribes  are  right — 
only  (as  Matthew,  who  is  primary  here,  adds,  17  :  12)  the  religious 
leaders — as  well  as  the  disciples  themselves — did  not  recognize  him, 
because  they  failed  to  understand  that  his  restoring  ministry  must 
be  a  spiritual  one  and  therefore  must  bring  him  necessarily  to  suffering 
and  death.  Consequently,  if  they,  as  well  as  the  Scribes,  had  not 
understood  what  Scripture  required  of  the  IVIessianic  forerunner,  in 
the  way  of  suffering  and  rejection,  how  were  they  to  explain  what  is 
written  of  the  Son  of  Man  that  he  should  suffer  many  things  and 
be  set  at  nought?  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Elijah  is  come  and  the  re- 
ligious leaders  have  done  unto  him  what  their  hostility  to  his  spiritual 
ministry  impelled  them  to  do — as  the  ministry  of  Elijah  himself  made 

134 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

13.  many  things  and  be  set  at  nought?  But  I  say  unto 
you,  that  Elijah  is  come,  and  they  have  also  done 
unto  him  whatsoever  they  would,  even  as  it  is  written 
of  him. 

14.  And  when  they  came  to  the  disciples,  they  saw  a 
great  multitude  about  them,  and  scribes  questioning 

15.  with  them.  And  straightway  all  the  multitude, 
when  they  saw  him,  were  greatly  amazed,  and  running 

16.  to  him  saluted  him.    And  he  asked  them,  What  ques- 

plain  might  be  expected  of  his  antitype  (cf.  i  Kings  19  :  2,  10). 
Matthew  (who  is  again  primary  here)  adds  that  the  disciples  there- 
upon "understood  that  he  spake  unto  them  of  John  the  Baptist" 
(17  :  13).  This  makes  clear  that  the  reason  why  they  had  not  under- 
stood his  former  reference  to  the  Baptist  as  EHjah  (cf.  Matt.  11  :  14) 
was  because  they  had  not  yet  reached  the  spiritual  conception  of  the 
Master's  ministry,  much  less  that  of  the  Baptist,  since  they  had  not 
then  come — as  they  were  only  now  with  difficulty  beginning  to 
come — to  the  realizing  sense  of  how  a  spiritual  ministry  must,  in  view 
of  the  political  materialism  to  which  Judaism  was  committed,  neces- 
sarily bring  upon  itself  hostility  and  rejection  and  death. 

(j)  The  Healing  of  the  Epileptic  Boy,  9  :  14-29 

14.  A  great  multitude:  The  disciples'  confession  had  been  made 
on  the  way  towards  the  suburbs  of  Caesarea  Philippi.  The  week 
which  had  followed  that  event  Jesus  probably  spent  in  these  villages, 
being  less  in  retirement  from  the  people,  now  that  the  main  result  of 
his  instruction  of  the  disciples  was  secured.  In  such  a  case,  it  would 
not  be  long  before  a  following  would  gather  around  him  and  cases  of 
sickness  be  pressed  upon  him  for  healing  (cf.  7  :  24f.),  and  in  his 
absence,  upon  his  disciples  (cf.  6  :  i2f.).  On  this  particular  occasion, 
the  crowd  had  been  augmented  because  of  the  discussion  which  was 
going  on;  for  the  Scribes  were  questioning  (lit.  disputing)  with  the 
disciples,  doubtless  as  to  the  cause  of  their  inability  to  heal  the  case 
which  had  been  brought  to  them  (see  ver.  18). 

15.  Amazed — startled,  and  at  the  same  time  relieved  (cf.  16  :  5). 
It  was  not  the  shock  of  awe,  as  though  his  person  still  bore  the  glory 
of  the  Transfiguration,  for  they  ran  to  him  and  saluted  him,  as  was 
their  habit  with  the  Rabbis.  It  was  rather  the  surprise  of  his  un- 
expected and  yet  most  opportune  appearance. 

16-18.  He  asked  them — the  people  who  had  run  to  meet  him, 

135 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

17.  tion  ye  with  them?  And  one  of  the  multitude  an- 
swered him,  Teacher,  I  brought  unto  thee  my  son,  who 

18.  hath  a  dumb  spirit;  and  wheresoever  it  taketh  him, 
it  dasheth  him  down:  and  he  foameth,  and  grindeth 
his  teeth,  and  pineth  away:  and  I  spake  to  thy  disciples 
that  they  should  cast  it  out;  and  they  were  not  able. 

19.  And  he  answereth  them  and  saith,  O  faithless  genera- 
tion, how  long  shall  I  be  with  you?  how  long  shall  I 

for  the  only  impression  he  got  as  he  approached  the  place  was  of 
a  dispute  between  the  people  generally  and  the  disciples.  A  dumb 
spirit — designated  by  Jesus  in  his  exorcising  command  "dumb  and 
deaf  spirit"  (ver.  25).  In  view  of  the  fact  that  epilepsy — as  Mat- 
thew distinctively  names  the  disease  (17  :  15) — is  mostly  attended 
by  complete  unconsciousness,  the  impression  on  the  bystanders  of 
dumbness  and  deafness  might  be  complete.  The  cry  referred  to 
in  Lk.  9  :  39  usually  precedes  the  attack.  Dasheth  him  down  (lit. 
rendeth  him):  The  reference  is  to  the  initial  convulsions  with  which 
the  patient  is  seized  and  thrown  to  the  ground.  Grindeth  (lit. 
squeaketh)  the  teeth.  Pineth  away  (ht.  wiihercth  up):  This  may 
indicate  either  the  general  wasting  effect  of  the  disease  upon  the 
system,  or  the  distinctive  stiffening  and  convulsive  setting  of  the 
limbs  during  the  first  stage  of  the  attack,  or  the  stupor  which  follows 
the  final  stage  and  which  may  be  long  continued  (cf.  ver.  26). 

19.  Answereth  them:  Jesus'  reply  is  addressed  not  merely  to 
the  father,  but  to  the  general  company,  including  most  specifically 
the  disciples.  They  were  all  characterized  as  belonging  to  the  gen- 
eration with  whose  unbelieving  presence  he  was  constantly  oppressed 
—the  Scribes,  because  of  their  hostile  attitude  toward  the  disciples, 
in  view  of  their  failure,  the  father,  because  of  the  hopelessness  into 
which  he  had  fallen  through  the  disciples'  failure,  and  the  disciples 
themselves,  because  of  the  failure  they  had  made.  When  we  re- 
member that  they  had  more  than  once  received  authority  to  cast 
out  demons  (cf.  3:i5;6:7,  13),  and  that  they  had  not  only  been 
spiritually  instructed  during  the  recent  period  of  retirement,  but  in 
virtue  of  this  instruction  had  come  to  definite  spiritual  convictions 
regarding  himself  and  his  ministry,  we  can  understand  the  Master's 
disappointment  at  their  failure  to  realize  that  spirituality  of  ministry 
which  before  long  would  be  a  necessity  to  them,  if  his  work  was  to 
be  carried  on.  It  was  similar  to  his  disappointment  at  their  inability 
to  understand  his  warning  against  the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees  and 
of  Herod  (8  :  17,  21) — only  deepened  by  his  experience  on  the  Mount, 

136 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

20.  bear  with  you?  bring  him  unto  me.  And  they  brought 
him  unto  him:  and  when  he  saw  him,  straightway 
the  spirit  tare  him  grievously;  and  he  fell  on  the 

21.  ground,  and  wallowed  foaming.  And  he  asked  his 
father,  How  long  time  is  it  since  this  hath  come  unto 

22.  him?  And  he  said,  From  a  child.  And  oft-times  it 
hath  cast  him  both  into  the  fire  and  into  the  waters, 

which  had  made  him  feel  all  the  more  intensely  the  dependence  of  his 
work  on  the  spirituality  of  vision  and  service  with  which  his  dis- 
ciples should  be  possessed.  How  long  shall  I  be  with  you  .  .  . 
bear  with  you?  All  their  experience  of  his  Ministry — personal  and 
instructional — appeared  to  have  been  in  vain.  How  long  would  he 
have  to  be  with  them  and  bear  with  them  in  order  spiritually  to  eni- 
power  them  for  the  work  they  eventually  would  have  to  face?  Their 
faithlessness  was,  consequently,  not  the  lack  of  some  specific  faith 
which  they  should  have  exercised  in  order  to  secure  specific  power 
for  this  particular  malady,  but  that  general  lack  of  conscious  fellow- 
ship with  him,  as  one  spiritually  able  himself  to  cast  opt  demons  and, 
therefore,  spiritually  able  through  this  fellowship  to  give  theni  power 
to  cast  them  out.  Of  this  fellowship  they  had  been  conscious  on 
their  last  heralding  tour  (cf.  6  :  13);  but  they  had  lost  it  during  his 
short  absence  from  them  on  the  Mount.  Evidently  it  was  not  to 
become  an  abiding  element  in  their  lives  until  Pentecost  (cf.  Acts 
2  :  43). 

20.  Tore  him  grievously  (lit.  completely  convulsed  him)  .  .  . 
fell  to  the  ground— a  separate  statement  of  the  two  symptoms  of 
the  first  stage  of  the  attack,  which  are  combined  in  the  preceding 
phrase  "dasheth  him  down"  (ver.  18).  Wallowed  (lit.  rolled  around) 
—the  muscular  spasms  of  the  second  stage,  which  throw  the  whole 
body  into  violent  agitation. 

21-24.  How  long  time  .  .  .  come  imto  him?  Jesus'  desire  was 
to  arouse  in  the  father's  soul  a  faith  that  would  measure  up  to  the 
conditions  with  which  he  was  confronted  in  the  case.  The  father's 
reply  that  the  boy  had  been  afiSicted  from  a  child,  and  that,  through 
the  disease,  he  had  often  tried  to  destroy  himself,  showed  that  the 
case  was  one  of  long  standing  as  well  as  of  desperate  character,  and 
that  his  failure  to  obtain  relief  for  it  through  ordinary  exorcism  and 
from  the  disciples  had  brought  him  to  a  state  of  almost  hopelessness 
as  to  any  cure  at  all.  If  thou  canst! — a  throwing  back  upon  the 
father  of  his  own  expression  in  such  a  form  as  to  emphasize  the  ele- 
ment of  doubt  which  lay  in  it.     All  things  are  possible  .  .  .  be- 

137 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

to  destroy  him:  but  if  thou  canst  do  anything,  have 

23.  compassion  on  us,  and  help  us.  And  Jesus  said  unto 
him.  If  thou  canst !    All  things  are  possible  to  him  that 

24.  believeth.  Straightway  the  father  of  the  child  cried 
out,  and  said,^  I  believe;  help  thou  mine  unbelief. 

25.  And  when  Jesus  saw  that  a  multitude  came  running 
together,  he  rebuked  the  unclean  spirit,  saying  unto 
him.  Thou  dumb  and  deaf  spirit,  I  command  thee, 

26.  come  out  of  him,  and  enter  no  more  into  him.  And 
having  cried  out,  and  ^  torn  him  much,  he  came  out: 
and  the  boy  became  as  one  dead;  insomuch  that  the 

27.  more  part  said.  He  is  dead.    But  Jesus  took  him  by 

28.  the  hand,  and  raised  him  up;  and  he  arose.  And 
when  he  was  come  into  the  house,  his  disciples  asked 
him  privately,  ^  How  is  it  that  we  could  not  cast  it  out? 

29.  And  he  said  unto  them,  This  kind  can  come  out  by 
nothing,  save  by  prayer  } 

1  Many  MSS.  add  imth  tears.  2  convulsed  cf .  i  :  26. 

3  We  could  not  cast  it  out.  *  Many  MSS.  add  and  fasting. 

lieveth:  The  possibility  of  the  cure  depended  only  upon  the  reality 
of  the  father's  faith  (see  Hogg,  Christ's  Message  of  the  Kingdom, 
p.  i69f.).  I  believe;  help  thou  my  unbelief:  The  father  is  wilHng 
to  believe  as  far  as  he  can,  but  wishes  his  poor  faith  to  be  responded 
to  by  Jesus,  in  spite  of  the  imperfection  which  still  resides  in  it. 

25-27.  Having  cried  out:  Doubtless,  a  fresh  attack,  though  less 
acute  and  followed  by  the  stupor  which  always  ends  the  series  of 
seizures.  From  this  stupor  Jesus  aroused  him  and  from  that  hour 
the  boy  was  cured  (cf.  Matt.  17  :  18). 

28,  2Q.  How  is  it  that  we  could  not  cast  it  out?  That  the  dis- 
ciples did  not  understand  the  reason  for  their  failure  shows  how 
slow  of  mind  they  were,  as  well  as  how  lacking  in  spiritual  fellowship 
with  their  Master.  This  kind — not  this  case  by  itself,  but  all  cases 
of  demonic  possession,  as  constituting  a  peculiar  class.  By  nothing 
save  by  prayer:  After  his  inclusion  of  the  disciples  in  the  "faithless 
generation"  (ver,  19)  and  his  demand  upon  the  father  for  faith  (ver. 
23),  it  is  clear  that  Jesus  does  not  mean  that  the  disciples  lacked  an 

138 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


(B)  On  the  Last  Journey  to  Jerusalem,  g  :  30-10  :  52 

30.  And  they  went  forth  from  thence,  and  passed 
through  Galilee;   and  he  would  not  that  any  man 

31.  should  know  it.  For  he  taught  his  disciples,  and  said 
unto  them,  The  Son  of  man  is  delivered  up  into  the 
hands  of  men,  and  they  shall  kill  him;  and  when  he  is 

T,2.  killed,  after  three  days  he  shall  rise  again.  But  they 
understood  not  the  saying,  and  were  afraid  to  ask  him. 

expression  of  their  faith  in  prayer,  but  that  they  lacked  the  faith 
which  would  naturally  express  itself  in  prayer  (cf.  Matt.  17  :  20). 
And  this  faith  was  not  mere  general  belief  in  religious  truth,  but  a 
specific  sense  of  dependent  fellowship  with  hun,  as  powerful  in  him- 
self, and  thus  the  source  of  power  for  them  over  these  peculiar  mala- 
dies of  demonic  possession.  Involving,  as  they  did,  the  presence  of 
an  evil  power,  they  necessitated  the  presence  of  a  spiritual  power 
in  those  who  would  cast  them  out.  While,  therefore,  faith  was  neces- 
sary for  all  miracles  (cf.  11  :  23)  and  prayer,  as  expressing  faith, 
for  all  bestowal  of  power  (cf.  11  :  24),  this  kind  of  malady  would  not 
yield  unless  the  evil  power  within  it  recognized  the  presence  of  a 
mastering  spiritual  power  in  those  who  would  cast  it  out  (cf.  Acts 
19  :  13-16).  Luke  makes  no  mention  of  the  disciples'^  question, 
while  Matthew  enlarges  the  Master's  answer,  along  the  lines  of  his 
remarks  in  connection  with  the  fig  tree  (21  :  2if.). 

(i)  Return  through  Galilee,  with  a  Second  Announcement  of  the  Passion, 
9  •  30-32 
30-32.  Passed  through  Galilee  (lit.  passed  alongside  through 
Galilee)— evidently  oflf  of  the  beaten  tracks.  (But  see  ver.  33f.). 
The  marginal  reading  in  Matt.  17  :  22  would  seem  to  indicate  that 
they  broke  up  into  small  groups,  going  different  routes,  and  reas- 
sembling afterwards.  Most  probably,  they  came  along  the  less  fre- 
quented roads,  avoiding  Bethsaida  and  the  crossing  of  the  Lake. 
He  would  not  that  any  man  should  know  it:  The  reason  for  this 
is  given  in  the  following  verse.  He  was  still  in  the  process  of  prepar- 
ing his  disciples  for  the  great  crisis  soon  to  come,  and  he  must  avoid 
even  the  publicity  to  which  they  had  been  subjected  in  the  suburbs 
of  Cssarea  Philippi.  Most  likely,  the  disclosure  in  the  case  of  the 
epileptic  boy  of  the  disciples'  lack,  not  only  of  spiritual  fellowship 
with  him,  but  of  any  realizing  sense  of  the  need  of  it,  made  clear  to 
him  the  necessity  of  renewed  instruction  in  the  time  still  left  to  them 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

33.  And  they  came  to  Capernaum:  and  when  he  was 
in  the  house  he  asked  them,  What  were  ye  reasoning 

34.  on  the  way?     But  they  held  their  peace:  for  they 
had  disputed  one  with  another  on  the  way,  who  was 

before  they  mingled  with  the  travellers  along  the  road  to  Jerusalem. 
Delivered  up  (rendered  "betrayed,"  in  3  :  ip):  This  is  the  new  ele- 
ment in  the  announcement  (cf.  8  :  31),  and  it  was  this  strange  and 
hard  to  be  credited  prediction — apparently  already  in  process  of 
accompHshment  (note  the  present  tense,  "is  delivered  up") — that 
they  could  not  understand  and  about  which,  naturally,  they  were 
afraid  to  ask  him,  lest  it  should  unfold  things  more  unwelcome 
and  disheartening  than  anything  they  had  yet  heard  of  this  coming 
catastrophe.  Matthew  says  nothing  of  their  difficulty  of  under- 
standing what  was  meant  (17  :  23);  while  Luke  speaks  of  the  meaning 
as  having  been  hidden  from  them,  with  the  purpose  that  they  should 
not  understand  it  (9  :  45)- 

(2)  The  Dispute  of  the  Disciples,  g  :  33-50 

33,  34.  Capemaiun:  That  Jesus  with  his  company  should  have 
come  into  this  city,  which  had  been  the  headquarters  of  his  Galilean 
work,  when  his  desire  was  to  pass  through  Galilee  without  public 
notice  is  explained  only  by  the  facts  given  us  in  the  Fourth  Gospel — 
that  his  former  following,  centered  in  this  place,  had  lost  all  sym- 
pathy with  his  ideas  and  had  practically  deserted  him  (6  :  66).  The 
significance  of  this  alienation  Jesus  fully  understood.  He  has  no 
hesitancy,  therefore,  in  going  again  into  the  city;  and  it  would 
seem  that  he  made  no  mistake  in  so  doing,  for  apparently  no  atten- 
tion was  given  to  his  presence,  beyond  an  official  and  probably  hostile 
inquiry  made  of  Peter  as  to  whether  his  Master  was  in  the  habit  of 
paying  the  half-shekel  tax  into  the  Temple  treasury  (cf.  Matt.  17  : 
24-27).  This  was  Jesus'  last  visit  to  this  city.  What  were  ye  rea- 
soning? It  seems  strange  that  in  the  light  of  such  solemn  disclosures 
as  Jesus  had  been  making  to  the  disciples  regarding  the  future  before 
them  and  his  earnest  and  persistent  efifort  to  bring  them  into  a  spir- 
itual appreciation  of  his  ministry  and  their  own  discipleship,  they 
should  have  been  discussing  among  themselves  who  was  the  greatest 
— a  discussion  which  must  have  involved  the  question  as  to  the 
honors  and  preferments  which  were  to  come  to  them  in  the  material 
Kingdom  for  which  they  still  looked  as  the  outcome  of  their  Mas- 
ter's mission.  They  must  have  had  some  consciousness  of  the  unfit- 
ness of  the  subject;  for  when  he  asked  them  what  it  had  been,  they 
held  their  peace.  Possibly,  through  some  such  eschatological  state- 
ments as  are  given  later  in  Matt.  19  :  28,  and  which  Jesus  may  have 

140 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


35.  the  1  greatest.  And  he  sat  down,  and  called  the 
twelve;  and  he  saith  unto  them,  If  any  man  would 
be  first,  he  shall  be  last  of  all,  and  servant  of  all. 

36.  And  he  took  a  little  child,  and  set  him  in  the  midst 
of  them :  and  taking  him  in  his  arms,  he  said  unto  them, 

37.  Whosoever  shall  receive  one  of  such  little  children  in 
my  name,  receiveth  me:  and  whosoever  receiveth  me, 
receiveth  not  me,  but  him  that  sent  me. 


1  Grk.  greater. 


made  already  on  more  than  one  occasion,  their  long  held  National 
ideas  of  the  future  were  nourished  and  fostered,  in  spite  of  the  spir- 
itual conditions  which  the  Master's  instructions  had  imposed  upon 
their  discipleship.  At  all  events,  they  preserved  this  mixture  of  the 
material  and  the  spiritual  in  their  ideas  during  the  following  journey 
to  Jerusalem  (cf.  10  :  35-41),  at  the  Last  Supper  (Lk.  22  :  24-30; 
cf.   also   Jn.    13:3-17),   and  even  after   the   Resurrection    (Acts 

35-37.  Last  of  all  and  servant  (Ut.  minister)  of  all:  The  Master 
does  not  denounce  all  idea  of  greatness,  but  corrects  their  material 
conception  of  it  by  showing  them  in  what  true  greatness  really  con- 
sists—in the  spirit,  not  of  mere  self-depreciation— which  is  often 
false  pride— but  in  the  spirit  of  a  genuine  self-forgetting  service  to 
others  (cf.  10  -.42-45;  Lk.  22  :  24-26).  To  illustrate  this,  he  takes 
one  of  the  children  of  the  household  and,  bringing  it  out  before  them 
all,  takes  it  into  his  arms  (so  only  Mark)— as  though  to  show  them 
that,  Messiah  though  he  was  and  burdened  with  the  solemn  weight 
of  his  mission  to  the  world,  he  had  no  other  thought  than  through 
this  attention  then  and  there  to  minister  to  the  happiness  of  this 
childish  heart.  We  can  easily  beUeve  this  was  his  constant  custom; 
he  only  used  it  now  to  point  his  teaching.  One  of  such  little  chil- 
dren—not necessarily  children  in  years,  but  children  in  helplessness 
and  need.  Whosoever  receives— takes  into  his  care,  helps  and  serves 
—those  who  are  in  need  of  such  ministry,  ministers  not  only  unto 
them,  but  unto  me,  and  not  only  unto  me,  but  unto  him  that  sent 
me.  This  comes  from  the  fact  that  this  ministry  is  rendered  in  his 
name,  in  other  words,  that  it  is  done,  as  their  miracles  of  healing  were 
to  be  done,  in  the  consciousness  of  a  spiritual  fellowship  with  him, 
whose  aim  it  was  in  all  his  mission,  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to 
minister  (cf.  10  :  45).  Matthew  enlarges  upon  Jesus'  reply  (18  :  3f.); 
Luke  practically  reproduces  it  as  given  by  Mark  (9  :  47^0 • 

141 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

^S.      John  said  unto  him,  Teacher,  we  saw  one  casting 
out  demons  in  thy  name;  and  we  forbade  him,  because 

39.  he  followed  not  us.    But  Jesus  said.  Forbid  him  not: 
for  there  is  no  man  who  shall  do  a  ^  mighty  work  in 

40.  my  name,  and  be  able  quickly  to  speak  evil  of  me. 

41.  For  he  that  is  not  against  us  is  for  us.    For  whosoever 

1  Grk.  power. 

38-40.  John  said  unto  him:  This  may  have  been  an  interruption 
of  the  Master's  teaching,  which  is  obviously  resumed  at  ver.  41 — 
suggested  to  John  by  Jesus'  reference  to  a  ministry  in  his  name 
(ver.  37);  or,  on  the  same  suggestion,  it  may  have  been  inserted  here 
topically  by  Mark  from  some  other  occasion.  In  the  former  case, 
which  seems  the  more  probable,  it  is  a  reminiscence  on  John's  part 
of  a  much  earlier  experience;  since  in  the  present  popularly  discredited 
condition  of  Jesus'  work  it  was  not  likely  that  there  were  persons 
abroad  using  his  name  in  exorcisms.  "We  forbade  him :  If  spoken  at 
this  time,  John's  idea  was  that  here  was  a  ministry  in  his  name  that 
was  not  legitimate,  because  there  was  no  formal  connection  of  it 
with  the  work  which  they  themselves  were  doing.  Do  a  mighty 
work  .  .  .  and  be  able  quickly  (properly,  rashly,  inconsiderately) 
to  speak  evil  of  me:  The  work  having  been  accomplished  in  his  name, 
there  must  have  been  enough  of  fellowship  with  him  in  its  doing  to  at 
least  place  the  worker  in  sympathy  with  the  work  they  were  carrying 
on  against  the  powers  of  evil,  whether  there  was  a  formal  connection 
with  it  or  not.  Matt.  7  :  22f.  is  in  no  contradiction  of  this  position 
of  the  Master's;  since  the  wonder  workers  there  are  not  accused  of 
speaking  evil  against  him,  only  of  the  lack  of  that  reality  of  personal 
relationship  to  him  which  their  outward  respect  for  him  naturally 
implied.  Conversely,  the  failure  of  the  disciples  to  cure  the  epileptic 
(ver.  28)  was  due,  not  to  a  lack  of  real  personal  relationship  to  him, 
but  to  an  absence  of  that  spiritual  fellowship  with  him  which  their 
relationship  normally  called  for.  So  the  statement  of  ver.  40  is  not 
contradicted  by  the  seemingly  opposite  one  of  Matt.  12  :  30.  In  the 
former  case,  Jesus  means  that  he  who  works  in  sympathy  with  the 
good  he  is  doing  is  really  working  with  him,  though  not  outwardly 
one  of  his  workers;  in  the  latter  case,  he  means  that  he  who  is  out  of 
sympathy  with  what  he  is  doing  is  really  working  against  him,  though 
one  of  his  acknowledged  followers.  Matthew  has  not  preserved  this 
incident  of  John's  remark. 

41,  42.  A  cup  of  water:  The  teaching,  interrupted  at  ver.  37,  is 
here  resumed,  by  showing  the  disciples  that  even  in  services  rendered 

142 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

shall  give  you  a  cup  of  water  to  drink,  because  ye 
are  Christ's,  verily  I  say  unto  you,  he  shall  in  no  wise 

42.  lose  his  reward.  And  whosoever  shall  cause  one  of 
these  little  ones  that  believe  ^  on  me  to  stumble,  it 
■were  better  for  him  if  a  great  millstone  were  hanged 

43.  about  his  neck,  and  he  were  cast  into  the  sea.  And 
if  thy  hand  cause  thee  to  stumble,  cut  it  off:  it  is  good 
for  thee  to  enter  into  life  maimed,  rather  than  having 
thy  two  hands  to  go  into  hell,  into  the  unquench- 

1  Many  MSS.  omit  on  me. 

to  them  by  those  outside,  it  is  not  the  largeness  of  the  ministry  that 
marks  it  as  really  great,  but  the  spirit  of  conscious  fellowship  with 
him  in  which  the  act  is  done — a  fellowship  that  is  expressed  in  the 
motive  behind  the  doing:  Because  ye  are  Christ's  (lit.  in  the  name 
that  ye  are  Christ's).  Luke  does  not  resume  the  teaching  at  all,  and 
Matthew  takes  it  up  again  only  at  the  following  verse.  One  of  these 
little  ones  that  believe  on  me :  The  reference  is  not  to  those  who  are 
little  in  years,  but  in  the  maturity  of  their  discipleship  (see  notes  on 
ver.  37).  To  stumble :  Naturally,  the  converse  of  the  preceding  is  true, 
only  it  receives  its  real  significance  in  the  realm  of  spiritual  and  not  of 
physical  things;  since  it  is  only  spiritual  injury  which  can  really  harm. 
The  injury  here  referred  to  is  the  teaching  or  example  which  leads 
to  wrong  action  on  the  part  of  those  whose  immaturity  of  religious 
life  makes  them  lacking  in  discernment  of  conscience  or  in  strength  of 
character  (cf.  Rom.  14  :  13-15,  20-23;  i  Cor.  8  : 4,  7,  9-i3>  and  the 
Master's  own  action  during  this  stay  in  Capernaum,  Matt.  17  :  27). 
A  great  millstone  (lit.  an  ass-millstone) — the  upper  millstone  of 
the  larger  class  of  mills,  which  was  turned  by  an  ass,  instead  of  by  a 
woman,  as  in  the  case  of  the  hand  mills  (cf.  Ex.  II  :  5;  Matt.  24  :  41) — 
a  condition  of  certain  and  inescapable  destruction. 

43-48.  Thy  hand  cause  thee  to  stumble:  The  leading  astray  of 
oneself,  which  is  inexcusable  because  based  on  self-deception,  and 
avoidable  because  due  to  the  dominating  power  of  the  influences  and 
forces  of  the  material  living  over  the  spiritual  life  to  which  one  con- 
sciously yields.  Hand  .  .  .  foot  .  .  .  eye— used  illustratively  for 
the  lesser  interests  of  life,  which  readily  should  be  sacrificed  in  order 
to  secure  the  well-being  of  the  higher  spiritual  living  (cf.  Matt. 
5  :  2Qf.).  Life — is  thus  figurative  for  that  state  of  final  assured 
fellowship  with  God,  which  is  termed  in  ver.  47  "the  Kingdom  of 
God."     Hell    (lit.    Gehenna)— the   Valley   of  Hinnom,    which   lay 

143 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

45.  able  fire.^  And  if  thy  foot  cause  thee  to  stumble,  cut 
it  off:  it  is  good  for  thee  to  enter  into  life  halt,  rather 

47.  than  having  thy  two  feet  to  be  cast  into  hell.^  And 
if  thine  eye  cause  thee  to  stumble,  cast  it  out:  it  is 
good  for  thee  to  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God  with 
one  eye,  rather  than  having  two  eyes  to  be  cast  into 

48.  hell;  where  their  worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not 

49.  quenched.    For  every  one  shall  be  salted  with  fire.^ 

1  Verses  44  and  46,  which  are  identical  with  ver.  48,  are  omitted  by  the  best  MSS. 

2  Many  MSB.  add  and  every  sacrifice  shall  be  sailed  with  salt,  cf.  Lev.  2  ;  13. 

outside  of  Jerusalem,  and  was  the  site  of  the  ancient  fire  worship 
begun  by  Ahaz  (2  Chron.  28  :  3).  Through  the  desecration  of  this 
worship  by  Josiah  (2  Kings  23  :  10),  and  because  of  the  denunciation 
of  its  revival  under  Jehoiakim  (Ezek.  20  :3of.;  Jer.  7  :  3if.),  the 
place  became  an  object  of  such  abhorrence  that  it  stood  in  later 
Jewish  thought  as  the  symbol  of  the  place  of  eternal  punishment 
{Bk.  Enoch  27  :  i;  IV  Esdras  2  :  29).  There  seems  to  be  no  evidence 
that  it  served  as  a  dumping  ground  for  the  bodies  of  dead  animals  and 
criminals  and  the  general  refuse  of  the  city,  where  fires  were  kept 
burning  to  prevent  infection.  (See  art.  Gehenna,  Dictionary  of  the 
Bible,  Vol.  II.)  Worm  dieth  not  .  .  .  fire  is  not  quenched — a 
phrase  borrowed  from  Isa.  66  :  24,  where  it  seems  to  be  suggested  by 
the  destructive  forces  of  nature  (cf.  Isa.  5  :  24;  14  :  11),  rather  than 
by  processes  going  on  under  the  supposed  use  of  the  Valley  of  Hinnom. 
(See  notes  on  ver.  43.)  The  injuries  which  one  does  to  his  own  soul 
are  corrupting  and  destroying  beyond  any  which  may  be  done  to  it 
from  outside.  Verses  44  and  46  contain  this  same  phrase,  repeated  as 
a  refrain  after  the  exhortations  of  vs.  44  and  46,  and  are  omitted  as 
not  belonging  to  the  original  text. 

49,  50.  Salted  with  fire:  The  Old  Testament  sacrifices  were  salted 
with  salt  to  symbolize  the  covenant  relations  between  God  and 
Israel  (Lev.  2  :  13).  But  now  the  thing  which  characterized  the 
personal  relations  between  Jesus  and  his  disciples  was  that  they  were 
to  be  salted  with  fire,  not  as  a  symbol,  but  as  a  test,  in  order  to  con- 
sume the  evil  in  them  and  to  preserve  and  purify  the  good.  But 
this  result  depended  on  that  self-disciplining  power  within  themselves 
which  ruthlessly  sacrificed  every  lesser  interest  in  life  for  the  sake  of 
the  higher  spiritual  good  (see  notes  on  43),  and  so  turned  every 
testing  experience  into  a  strengthening  of  character  (cf.  Jas.  i  :  2-4). 
Whether  the  fire  should  destroy  or  preserve  depended  upon  this 
spiritual  "salt"  within  them  that  turned  its  destructive  element  into 

144 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

50.  Salt  is  good:  but  if  the  salt  have  lost  its  saltness,  where- 
with will  ye  season  it?  Have  salt  in  yourselves,  and 
be  at  peace  one  with  another. 

10.  And  he  arose  from  thence,  and  cometh  into  the 
borders  of  Judasa  and  beyond  the  Jordan:  and  multi- 
tudes come  together  unto  him  again;  and,  as  he  was 
wont,  he  taught  them  again. 

one  that  purified  and  enriched.  That  "salt"  was  efifective,  providing 
it  retained  its  saltness ;  if  that  were  lost,  there  was  no  way  by  which 
it  could  be  artificially  restored,  and  these  testing  experiences  of  life 
be  saved  from  their  destructive  results.  The  exhortation  with  which 
the  teaching  closes  is  thus  perfectly  in  keeping  with  what  has  pre- 
ceded: Have  salt  in  yourselves,  and,  as  that  gracious  power  of  self- 
discipline  would  be  lost  to  them  if,  in  the  spirit  of  self-seeking,  they 
disputed  among  themselves  as  to  who  should  be  greatest  (ver.  ^5), 
be  at  peace  one  with  another.  Matthew  continues  the  instruction 
at  great  length  (18  :  10-35);  Luke  seems  to  refer  to  it  in  14  :  34f.  and, 
as  presented  by  Matthew  as  well  as  by  Mark,  in  17  :  1-4. 

(i)  Departure  from  Galilee  ayid  Journeys  in  Judcea  and  beyond  the 
Jordan,  10  : 1-12 

10:1.  From  thence — Capernaum  (cf.  9:33).  Cometh  into 
the  borders  of  Judaea  and  beyond  the  Jordan — a  general  state- 
ment covering  the  interim  between  the  departure  from  Galilee  and 
the  arrival  at  Jericho  (ver.  46),  before  his  entry  into  Jerusalem 
(11  :  i).  According  to  Luke,  part  of  the  journey  was  through  Sa- 
maria (9  :  51-56;  17  :  11);  Matthew  says  he  came  into  the  borders  of 
Judaea  beyond  the  Jordan,  as  though  Judaea  extended  East  of  that 
river  (19  :  i);  John  records  that  he  made  two  visits  to  Jerusalem — 
one  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  in  September  (7  :  2,  14),  and  another 
at  the  Feast  of  Dedication  in  December  (10  :  22) — that  after  this 
second  visit  he  retired  to  Bethany  beyond  the  Jordan  (10  :  40) — 
possibly  north  of  Peraea  (cf.  Guthe,  Bihel- Atlas,  Plate  14),  though  the 
site  is  uncertain — from  which  place,  at  the  death  of  Lazarus,  he 
returned  to  Bethany,  on  the  Mount  of  Olives  (11  :  1-17))  afterwards 
retiring  to  a  city  called  Ephraim  (11  :  54),  a  few  miles  Northeast  of 
Jerusalem,  and  coming  finally  from  there  by  the  way  of  Jericho  to 
Jerusalem.  Evidently,  therefore,  whatever  may  have  been  his  route 
from  Galilee  southwards,  he  did  not  spend  all  the  time  between  Sum- 
mer and  the  following  Spring  on  the  journey,  but  passed  not  a  little 
of  the  interval  between  his  first  arrival  at  Jerusalem,  in  September, 

145 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

2.  And  there  came  unto  him  Pharisees,  and  asked  him, 
Is  it  lawful  for  a  man  to  put  away  his  wife?  trying 

3.  him.    And  he  answered  and  said  unto  them,  What 

4.  did  Moses  command  you?     And  they  said,  Moses 
suffered  to  write  a  bill  of  divorcement,  and  to  put  her 

5.  away.    But  Jesus  said  unto  them,  For  your  hardness 

and  his  final  entry,  in  April,  in  the  city  itself,  and  the  rest  of  it  both 
in  Judaea  and  beyond  the  Jordan.  Luke  has  inserted  some  ten 
chapters  of  incidents  and  teachings  (9  :  51-19  :  28)  as  occurring 
during  this  period.  Many  of  them  are  not  related  in  sequence  {e.g. 
II  :  14-36).  Some  of  them  clearly  belong  earlier  in  his  ministry 
{e.g.  10  :  25;  II  :  i;  13  :  10;  14  :  i;  17  :  11;  18  :  i).  Matthew  com- 
presses his  record  into  two  chapters  (19  :  1-2 1  :  i).  Mark  gives  his 
in  one  (10  : 1-52).  Multitudes  come  .  .  .  unto  him:  It  is  clear 
that  after  he  left  Galilee,  where  his  following  had  broken  with  him 
(cf.  Jn.  6  :  66),  probably  after  he  had  passed  beyond  Samaria  (cf. 
Lk.  9  :  51-56),  the  multitudes  again  crowded  around  him,  and  he 
taught  them  fully  and  freely  (cf.  Lk.  12  :  i;  14  :  25;  15  :  i).  As  the 
crisis  of  his  work  was  approaching,  it  was  necessary,  not  only  again 
clearly  to  place  before  the  people  the  spiritual  character  of  his  minis- 
try, but  to  reestablish  that  sifting  process  among  his  followers  by 
which  those  who  were  receptive  to  his  message  should  be  drawn 
personally  closer  to  him  and  those  that  were  not  should  have  a  chance 
to  go  their  chosen  way.  (See  notes  on  4  :  if.)  This  accounts  for 
the  large  amount  of  parabolic  teaching  during  this  period  (cf.  Lk. 
10  :  25-36;  II  :  5-13;  12  :  16-21,42-48;  13  :  6-9;  14  :  16-24;  i5  :  3-32; 
16  : 1-13, 19-31; 18  :  1-14; 19  :  11-27). 

{Question  of  the  Pharisees  Concerning  Divorce,  vs.  2-12) 

2-9.  Pharisees — members  of  the  Pharisaic  party.  Is  it  lawful  .  .  . 
to  put  away  his  wife?  This  question  they  put  to  him,  with  the  pur- 
pose of  trying  him,  testing  him,  on  this  question  debated  between  the 
Schools  of  Hillel  and  Shammai,  as  to  whether  a  man  could  divorce  his 
wife  for  any  cause  (cf.  Matt  19  :  3),  or  for  no  cause  save  that  of 
infidelity.  It  may  be  that  they  already  knew  of  the  pronouncement 
on  this  question  which  Matthew  reports  Jesus  as  having  made  in  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  (5  :  3 if.).  At  all  events,  it  was  an  opportunity 
to  drag  him  into  the  heated  argument  of  the  law's  interpretation,  as 
it  was  debated  by  the  Rabbis  and  their  followers.  This  they  had  not 
yet  attempted  with  Jesus.  They  had  criticized  him  for  apparent 
blasphemy  (2  :  7),  for  open  comradeship  with  the  unchurched  (2  :  16), 
for  obvious  infractions  of  the  ceremonial  law  (2  :  24;  7  :  1-5).     In 

146 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

6.  of  heart  he  wrote  you  this  commandment.    But  from 
the  beginning  of  the  creation,  Male  and  female  made 

7.  he  them.    For  this  cause  shall  a  man  leave  his  father 

8.  and  mother,  and  shall  cleave  to  his  wife;  and  the  two 
shall  become  one  flesh:  so  that  they  are  no  more  two, 

9.  but  one  flesh.     What  therefore  God  hath  joined  to- 

desperation  at  his  popularity,  they  had  accused  him  of  being  in  league 
with  Satan  (3  :  22),  and  after  that  popularity  had  gone,  they  had 
tried  to  entrap  him  into  further  disfavor  with  the  people  (8  :  11). 
But  here  is  an  attempt  to  entangle  him  in  the  fanatical  discussions  of 
the  Schools,  as  the  Sadducees  later  in  Holy  Week  tried  to  involve 
him  in  the  radical  disputes  between  themselves  and  the  Pharisees 
(12  :  18-23),  beyond  which  there  was  but  one  possibility — to  enmesh 
him  in  the  political  passions  of  the  people  against  Rome  (12  :  i3f.)- 
What  did  Moses  command  you?  Jesus  goes  to  the  root  of  the  mat- 
ter by  asking  for  the  law  on  which  their  question  ought  to  be  based. 
That  law  is  given  in  Deut.  24  :  i,  and  is  correctly  stated  by  the 
Pharisees  in  their  reply,  Moses  suffered  {allowed,  permitted)  to 
write  a  bill  of  divorcement,  and  to  put  her  away.  Whether  his 
inquisitors  were  acquainted  with  his  own  position,  or  not,  it  was  one 
that  was  opposed  to  this  position  of  the  Law,  but  only  as  a  fuller 
expression  is  opposed  to  a  less  mature  expression  of  the  same  fun- 
damental principle.  This  principle  was  the  unlawfulness  of  separa- 
tion between  man  and  wife  without  cause.  The  Law  defined  the 
cause  in  terms  which  rested  the  action  largely  in  the  good  will  and 
pleasure  of  the  man;  but  Jesus  states  that  it  did  so  because  of  the 
hardness  of  heart  on  the  part  of  those  for  whom  it  was  enacted,  by 
which  he  meant,  not  stubbornness  of  will,  but  crudeness  of  apprehen- 
sion. In  other  words,  the  law  was  determined  by  the  immaturity  of 
the  civilization  for  which  it  was  made.  Legislation  ahead  of  the  age 
was  no  more  possible  then  than  it  is  to-day;  but  behind  that  immature 
legislation  of  the  Mosaic  Law  was  the  primary  principle  that  God 
had  created  the  human  race  male  and  female,  and  that  when  they 
were  united  in  marriage,  they  belonged  together  beyond  separation, 
except  for  cause.  The  development  of  civilization  in  Jesus'  day  made 
the  full  expression  of  this  primary  principle  possible,  and  this  full 
expression  of  it  Jesus  gave  when  he  added,  For  this  cause — because 
of  the  physical  relation  between  them  created  by  God — a  man  shall 
leave  his  father  and  mother  ("and  shall  cleave  to  his  wife  "  is  adopted 
from  the  Old  Testament  passage.  Gen.  2  :  24,  and  is  not  part  of  the 
original  text  of  the  passage.  It  should,  therefore,  be  omitted);  and 
the  two  shall  become  one  flesh — in  a  union  which  is  based  on  this 

147 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

10.  gether,  let  not  man  put  asunder.    And  in  the  house 

11.  the  disciples  asked  him  again  of  this  matter.  And 
he  saith  unto  them,  Whosoever  shall  put  away  his 
wife,  and  marry  another,  committeth  adultery  against 

12.  her:  and  if  she  herself  shall  put  away  her  husband,  and 
marry  another,  she  committeth  adultery. 

13.  And  they  were  bringing  unto  him  little  children, 
that  he  should  touch  them:  and  the  disciples  rebuked 

primary  physical  relation  and  is,  therefore,  more  close  and  binding 
than  that  which  exists  between  child  and  parent,  and  consequently 
cannot  be  broken  by  any  act,  save  that  which  in  itself  nullifies  the 
physical  relationship  and  dissolves  the  union.  What  therefore  God 
hath  joined  together:  By  this  underlying  principle  of  the  physical 
relation  between  man  and  wife,  man  has  no  right  to  put  asunder, 
by  any  mere  enactment  of  legal  divorce,  apart  from  that  act  of 
infideHty  which  sinfully  destroys  the  Divine  union  itself. 

10-12.  This  position  of  the  Master  was  apparently  so  contrary  to 
the  statement  of  the  Law  involving  such  a  profound  interpretation 
of  its  spirit,  that  when  they  came  together  in  the  house,  where  they 
were  staying,  the  disciples  naturally  went  back  to  the  discussion. 
Jesus  replies  by  assuming  his  fundamental  position  that  the  marriage 
union  cannot  be  dissolved  by  mere  divorce,  and  drawing  the  necessary 
inference  that  when  it  is  thus  dissolved  a  further  marriage  by  either 
party  is  adultery.  The  possibility  of  a  formal  divorcement  of  the 
husband  by  the  wife  is  given  only  by  Mark,  and  lay  outside  of  Jewish 
law.  As,  however,  it  was  recognized  by  the  Greeks  and  Romans  and 
its  practice  was  familiar  to  the  disciples  and  before  long  would  have 
to  be  faced  by  them  in  their  ministry  (cf.  i  Cor.  7  :  10-16),  there  is 
no  reason  10  doubt  that  the  Master  advanced  beyond  the  Jewish 
situation  in  his  personal  instruction  to  them,  and  made  the  statement 
as  given  in  our  passage.  Matthew  omits  the  disciples'  further  in- 
quiry and  the  Master's  reply,  though  he  adds  to  it  a  further  instruc- 
tion to  the  disciples  on  the  question  of  celibacy  (19  :  10-12).  He  in- 
serts, however,  in  his  answer  to  the  Pharisees,  as  in  his  statement  in 
the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (5  :  32),  the  distinctive  cause  on  which 
divorce  is  permissible  (19  : 9)  but  which,  as  shown  above,  is  clearly 
involved  in  Mark's  record. 

(4)  Jesus^  Blessing  of  Little  Children,  vs.  13-16 

13.  These  children  may  have  belonged  to  the  household  where 
Jesus  and  his  disciples  were  staying,  so  that  the  incident  may  have 

148 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

14.  them.  But  when  Jesus  saw  it,  he  was  moved  with 
indignation,  and  said  unto  them.  Suffer  the  little 
children  to  come  unto  me;  forbid  them  not:  for  ^  to 

15.  such  belongeth  the  kingdom  of  God.  Verily  I  say 
unto  you,  Whosoever  shall  not  receive  the  kingdom 
of  God  as  a  little  child,  he  shall  in  no  wise  enter  therein. 

16.  And  he  took  them  in  his  arms,  and  blessed  them,  lay- 
ing his  hands  upon  them. 

1  oj  such  is. 

followed  the  preceding,  though  it  is  possible  that  Mark  took  it  from 
some  other  occasion  on  the  journey  and  inserted  it  here  because  of  its 
topical  agreement  with  the  question  of  the  sacredness  of  the  marriage 
relation.  Matthew  seems  to  locate  it  here  (19  :  13);  Luke  has  no 
statement  of  its  time  or  place  (18  :  15).  The  fact  that  from  this 
point  on  the  three  Evangelists  keep  together  in  their  records  may 
possibly  indicate  that  the  remaining  incidents  belong  to  Jesus* 
return  from  Ephraim  (cf.  Jn.  11  :  54)  on  his  final  journey  to  Jerusalem 
(Swete,  ad  he,  and  on  ver.  46).  Touch  them — either  by  way  of 
imparting  some  physical  blessing  upon  their  young  hves,  or  after 
the  manner  of  the  benedictions  commonly  obtained  by  parents  for 
their  children  from  the  Rulers  of  the  Synagogues  (Buxtorf,  DeSynag., 
p.  138).  Disciples  rebuked  them — for  claiming  the  Master's  atten- 
tion with  what  seemed  to  them  a  trivial  affair. 

14-16.  Moved  with  indignation  (lit.  was  pained,  grieved,  given 
only  by  Mark) — at  the  disciples'  failure  to  appreciate  children,  not 
so  much  in  themselves,  as  in  their  relation  to  him  and  his  kingdom; 
for  to  such  like  minded  persons  as  these  children,  open-hearted  and 
receptive  to  his  teaching,  trustfully  dependent  upon  his  help,  loving 
and  loyal  to  himself,  belongeth  the  kingdom  of  God — it  is  theirs  to 
enter  and  to  enjoy  the  blessings  which  it  provides.  Without  such 
receptivity  to  the  kindgom  of  God,  as  a  truth  presented  to  the  soul 
and  a  claim  imposed  upon  the  life,  it  is  impossible  for  the  kingdom  of 
God  as  a  relationship  to  God — to  his  love  and  to  his  life — to  open  it- 
self to  anyone.  He  took  them  in  his  arms  and  blessed  them,  laying 
his  hands  upon  them:  His  blessing  was  spiritual  rather  than  physical, 
the  symbol  of  its  imparting  was  the  laying  on  of  his  hands;  but  the 
spirit  which  stood  behind  and  moved  through  all  the  action  was 
expressed  by  the  loving  embrace  in  which  he  enfolded  them.  Luke 
makes  no  mention  of  this  act  of  the  Master's,  while  Matthew  refers 
only  to  the  imposing  of  the  hands  (19  :  15). 

149 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

17.  And  as  he  was  going  forth  ^  into  the  way,  there  ran 
one  to  him,  and  kneeled  to  him,  and  asked  him,  Good 
Teacher,  what  shall  I  do  that  I  may  inherit  eternal 

1  on  his  way. 

(5)  The  Question  of  the  Rich  Young  Man,  vs.  17-31 

17.  This  incident  may  have  followed  in  sequence  upon  the  pre- 
ceding one,  as  that  may  have  done  upon  the  one  before  it.  At  the 
same  time,  there  is  the  possibihty  that  Mark  may  have  placed  it  here 
because  of  the  contrast  which  it  exhibited  with  the  childlike  spirit 
that  possessed  the  kingdom  of  God.  Neither  Matthew  (19  :  16)  nor 
Luke  (18  :  18)  give  any  indication  of  time  or  place.  One:  Both 
Mark  and  Matthew  are  indefinite  in  their  reference  to  him,  save  that 
Matthew  says  that  he  was  a  young  man  (19  :  20,  22),  and  both  unite 
with  Luke  in  stating  that  he  possessed  large  wealth  (Mk.  ver.  22; 
Matt.  19  :  22;  Lk.  18  :  23).  Luke  alone  refers  to  him  definitely  in 
calling  him  a  "ruler"  (18  :  18),  by  which  is  not  meant  a  member  of 
the  Sanhedrin,  for  his  youth  would  be  against  such  a  position,  but 
generally,  in  the  Rabbinic  usage  of  the  term,  a  man  of  ruUng  position 
in  the  community,  which  would  be  natural  through  his  wealth 
(Swete).  Kneeled  to  him  .  .  .  Good  Teacher:  It  is  clear  from  the 
incidents  on  this  journey  which  Mark  has  given  us,  that,  outside  of 
Galilee,  Jesus  had  lost  none  of  his  popularity  and  fame.  The  bringing 
of  little  children  to  him  for  his  blessing  (ver.  13);  the  respect  and 
reverence  with  which  this  Young  Man  addressed  him;  the  persistence 
with  which  the  Blind  Man  at  Jericho  called  to  him  (ver.  47f.);  even 
the  ambitious  request  of  the  two  disciples  (vs.  35-37)  and  the  cunning 
questioning  of  him  by  the  Pharisees  (ver.  2)  show,  as  well  as  the 
crowding  around  him  of  the  multitudes  (Lk.  12  :  i;  14  :  25;  15  :  i), 
that  people  were  still  under  the  power  of  his  personal  presence. 
Possibly  Jesus'  appearance  among  the  pilgrims  to  the  Passover, 
which  was  now  drawing  nigh  (see  notes  on  ver.  13),  especially  after 
his  continued  retirement  from  public  view,  created  the  expectancy  at 
which  Luke  more  than  once  hints  (17  :  20;  19  :  11)  that  Jesus  was 
now  about  to  proclaim  himself  and  the  kingdom  which  he  had  so 
widely  heralded  m  Galilee.  At  all  events,  as  he  proceeded  on  his 
way,  the  crowds  that  followed  were  apparently  under  the  strain  of 
some  awesome  apprehension  of  coming  events  (cf.  ver.  32).  What 
(Matthew  had  "What  good  thing,"  19  :  16)  shall  I  do  that  I  may 
inherit  eternal  life?  The  question,  unlike  that  of  the  lawyer  in  Lk. 
10  :  25,  was  perfectly  sincere.  Jesus  had  proclaimed  the  near  ap- 
proach of  the  Messianic  kingdom;  what  must  he  do  to  possess  its 
blessing  of  eternal  life?    But  it  failed  at  a  vital  point.    The  blessings 

ISO 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

1 8.  life?    And  Jesus  said  unto  him,  Why  callest  thou  me 

19.  good?  none  is  good  save  one,  even  God.  Thou  knowest 
the  commandments.  Do  not  kill,  Do  not  commit 
adultery.  Do  not  steal.  Do  not  bear  false  witness, 

20.  Do  not  defraud.  Honor  thy  father  and  mother.  And 
he  said  unto  him.  Teacher,  all  these  things  have  I 

ofifered  in  the  kingdom  that  Jesus  was  to  estabUsh  were  to  be  secured, 
not  by  personal  conduct  in  itself,  but  by  personal  conduct  which  was 
the  outcome  of  a  personal  relationship  to  him.  If  he  was  to  this 
young  man  nothing  more  than  a  Teacher — even  a  Good  Teacher — 
the  conduct  inquired  about  was  not  the  spiritual  product  of  a  personal 
commitment  of  the  soul  to  him,  but  the  meritorious  product  of  a  self- 
complacent  conduct  apart  from  him.  Jesus  must  make  this  clear  to 
him.  So  he  asks  him  what  was  involved  in  the  term  with  which  he 
addressed  him,  Why  callest  thou  me  Good  (Matthew,  who  is  not  pri- 
mary here,  renders  it  "Why  askest  thou  me  concerning  that  which 
is  good,"  19  :  17).  None  is  good  save  one,  even  God:  If  Jesus 
was  good  to  him  simply  as  one  who  could  give  wise  instruction, 
then  the  commandments  of  the  Decalogue  were  before  him;  if  he 
kept  them  perfectly,  he  would  be  rewarded  with  eternal  life  (cf.  Lk. 
10  :  2  7f.).  If  to  him,  however,  Jesus  was  good  in  himself — good,  as 
the  Supreme  Good,  as  God  is  good — then  it  was  for  him  to  commit 
his  life  to  Jesus'  personal  following.  What  would  he  say?  And 
the  young  ruler  replied.  Teacher,  all  these  things  have  I  observed 
from  my  youth — again,  the  statement  of  perfect  sincerity,  and  yet 
the  fact  that,  with  all  this  careful  observance  of  God's  commands,  he 
came  to  this  Teacher  for  further  instruction  betrays  the  fact  that  his 
heart  was  conscious  that  something  more  was  needed.  In  fact,  his 
coming  was  a  revolt  against  the  teaching  of  the  Scribes  that  eternal 
Hfe  was  to  be  secured  by  a  punctilious  performance,  not  only  of  all  the 
written  commands  of  the  Law,  but  of  all  the  unwritten  commands  of 
the  Rabbis.  He  came  to  ask  for  a  simpler  rule — one  that  could  be 
the  expression  of  his  real  desire  for  the  kingdom  of  God.  P'or  this 
consciousness  of  his  lack  (cf.  Matt.  19  :  20)  and  this  search  for  its 
supplying  Jesus  looking  upon  him  loved  him ;  for  this  showed  him 
as  faced  toward  the  one  thing  that  would  make  eternal  life  a  real- 
ity of  his  possession.  Go  sell  whatsoever  thou  hast  and  give  to  the 
poor  .  .  .  and  come,  follow  me — not  that  the  selUng  of  his  goods  in 
itself  was  to  give  him  eternal  life,  but  that  the  parting  with  them  was 
to  be  the  measure  of  his  willingness  to  commit  his  life  to  a  personal 
following  of  Jesus  as  his  Master.  To  him  Jesus  was  good  as  a  Teacher, 
but  not  as  the  Supreme  Good  in  himself— as  God  is  good, 

151 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

21.  observed  from  my  youth.  And  Jesus  looking  upon 
him  loved  him,  and  said  unto  him,  One  thing  thou 
lackest:  go,  sell  whatsoever  thou  hast,  and  give  to 
the  poor,  and  thou  shalt  have  treasure  in  heaven: 

22.  and  come,  follow  me.  But  his  countenance  fell  at 
the  saying,  and  he  went  away  sorrowful:  for  he  was 
one  that  had  great  possessions. 

23.  And  Jesus  looked  round  about,  and  saith  unto  his 

22.  And  here  was  where  he  failed.  He  was  willing  to  follow  Jesus' 
instruction  as  one  who  could  tell  him  the  commands  he  should  keep 
in  order  to  win  eternal  life;  but  he  was  not  willing  to  follow  Jesus' 
commands  as  himself  the  Lord  of  his  living.  He  had  kept  the  second 
table  of  the  Decalogue  which  forbade  harm  and  injustice  to  one's 
neighbor.  But  this  was  simply  negative.  The  positive  side  of  this 
expressed  by  such  a  mastership  over  his  great  possessions  by  Jesus  he 
was  not  willing  to  undertake.  And  the  reason  for  his  unwillingness 
was  the  simple  fact  that  while  the  need  of  which  he  was  conscious  in 
his  own  life  was  real,  he  had  no  appreciation  of  Jesus'  power  to  supply 
it  in  himself.  Not  Jesus  himself,  but  riches  were  to  him  still  the 
highest  good. 

23-27.  The  incident  was  too  significant  for  its  lesson  to  be  lost,  so 
turning  to  his  disciples  the  Alaster  said  How  hardly  (ht  ivith  what 
difficulty)  shall  they  that  have  riches  enter  into  the  Kingdom  of 
God!  Here  was  an  example  of  the  power  wealth  has  to  dim  the 
eyes  to  what  is  supremely  good  in  Hfe.  The  disciples  were  amazed — 
for  the  standards  to  which  they  were  accustomed  in  Judaism  made 
men  of  wealth  prominent  in  the  Church,  and  to  their  Nationalism — 
with  all  the  spiritual  ideas  and  conceptions  which  had  come  to  them 
through  their  fellowship  with  the  Master — the  Church  was  still  the 
gateway  to  the  coming  kingdom  (cf.  Acts  1:6;  10  :  28),  and  that 
kingdom  was  promised  to  be  full  of  prosperity,  with  the  wealth  of 
the  Nations  flowing  into  it  (cf.  Isa.  60  15,  11).  How  hard  is  it  ("for 
them  that  trust  in  riches"  is  not  a  part  of  the  original  text,  and  should 
be  omitted)  to  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God:  Jesus  explains  his 
first  statement  by  showing  that  entrance  into  the  kingdom  was  difficult 
in  itself.  It  was  not  an  easy  thing  for  anyone — situated  as  men  were 
then  in  Judaism  and  Heathenism — to  enter  the  kingdom  of  God. 
It  meant  a  change  of  the  entire  viewpoint  of  hfe — a  revolution  of  the 
whole  living  (cf.  Lk.  13  :  24).  The  inference  was  obvious — that  it 
must  be  harder  to  accomplish  this  entrance  if  one's  viewpoint  was 
aheady  mastered  by  wealth,  and  riches  had  spread  within  one  that 

152 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


disciples,  How  hardly  shall   they   that  have  riches 

24.  enterinto  the  kingdom  of  God!  And  the  disciples  were 
amazed  at  his  words.  But  Jesus  answereth  agam, 
and  saith  unto  them,  Children,  how  hard  is  it  ^  for 
them  that  trust  in  riches  to  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 

25.  God!  It  is  easier  for  a  camel  to  go  through  a  needle's 
eye,  than  for  a  rich  man  to  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 

26.  God.    And  they  were  astonished  exceedingly,  saying 

27.  2  unto  him,  Then  who  can  be  saved?  Jesus  looking 
upon  them  saith,  With  men  it  is  impossible,  but  not 

28.  with  God:  for  all  thmgs  are  possible  with  God.    Peter 

J  Some  MSS.  omit /or  them  that  trust  in  riches. 
2  Many  MSS.  read  among  themselves. 


soporific  of  ease  and  self-contentment  that  dulled  the  ear  to  any  call 
of  revolution.  Neither  Matthew  or  Luke  has  any  record  of  this 
astonishment  of  the  disciples  or  this  repetition  of  the  Master's  first 
remark.  Camel  .  .  .  needle's  eye:  The  phrase  is  to  be  taken  liter- 
ally and  is  an  oriental  way  of  illustrating  truth  through  exaggerated 
similes  (cf.  Matt.  6  :  23;  23  :  24).  It  put  a  rich  man's  entrance  into 
the  kingdom  as  a  pracdcally  impossible  thing.  Astonished  exceed- 
ingly (lit.  beyond  measure  startled  out  of  themselves) :  The  Master's 
first  statement  was  that  it  is  hard  for  a  rich  man  to  enter  the  kingdom; 
the  second  was  that  it  is  impossible.  Almost  naturally  they  asked 
Then  who  can  be  saved?  For  if  what  a  man  has  of  this  world's 
goods  increases  the  inherent  hardness  and  difiQcuIty  of  getring  into 
the  kingdom,  and  all  but  the  poverty  stricken  possess  something,  who 
IS  going  to  be  able  to  enter  it?  With  men  it  is  impossible  .  .  . 
possible  with  God:  With  men  alone,  subject  as  they  are  to  human 
views  and  influences,  to  the  controlling  and  compelling  forces  of  the 
worid,  it  is  hopeless;  but  salvation  is  a  thing,  not  only  which  has  to  do 
with  God,  but  in  which  God  has  to  do  with  men,  and  the  persuasive 
and  ennobling  power  of  his  Spirit  over  the  human  spirit  is  limited  by 
nothing  save  the  final  decision  of  man's  will. 

28-31.  We  have  left  all  and  have  followed  thee— implying,  as 
Matthew  definitely  adds,  "What  then  shall  \^^  have"  (19:27): 
This  outbreak  of  Peter's  came  almost  naturally  upon  the  incident 
and  the  Master's  following  words.  Through  God's  help  the  disciples, 
although  possessing  this  worid 's  goods,  had  been  enabled  to  leave  all 
and  follow  the  Master— was  there  assurance  in  this  fact  that  they 

153 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

began  to  say  unto  him,  Lo,  we  have  left  all,  and  have 

29.  followed  thee.  Jesus  said.  Verily  I  say  unto  you, 
There  is  no  man  that  hath  left  house,  or  brethren, 
or  sisters,  or  mother,  or  father,  or  children,  or  lands, 

30.  for  my  sake,  and  for  the  gospel's  sake,  but  he  shall 
receive  a  hundredfold  now  in  this  time,  houses,  and 
brethren,  and  sisters,  and  mothers,  and  children, 
and  lands,  with  persecutions;  and  in  the  ^  world  to 

31.  come  eternal  life.  But  many  that  are  first  shall  be 
last;  and  the  last  first. 

32.  And  they  were  on  the  way,  going  up  to  Jerusalem; 
and  Jesus  was  going  before  them:  and  they  were 


would  enter  into  the  blessings  of  the  kingdom?  A  hundred-fold — 
not  of  the  same  things,  but  of  those  things  which  would  supply  their 
places  more  abundantly  (cf.  3  :  32-35).  These  were  to  come  to  them 
now  in  this  time,  in  this  present  age,  before  the  looked-for  future 
Messianic  age,  but  with  persecutions  which,  as  they  saw  from  his  own 
ministry,  were  a  necessary  accompaniment  of  a  spiritual  message 
and  mission  to  the  world.  When,  however,  that  Messianic  age 
finally  came,  there  was  to  come  to  them  in  addition  that  eternal 
life  which  ever  since  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  (12:2)  had  been  looked 
forward  to  as  the  consummated  blessings  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 
Many  that  are  first  shall  be  last:  This  is  added  as  a  warning  against 
the  spirit  of  calculation  in  which  these  sacrifices  may  be  made.  The 
Master  had  indicated  the  only  right  spirit  when  he  placed  as  the 
condition  of  their  reward  that  they  were  to  be  made  for  his  sake — in 
the  spirit  of  personal  devotion  to  him.  All  blessings  of  his  spiritual 
kingdom,  both  in  this  life  and  that  to  come,  depended  upon  the 
spiritual  relations  of  their  personal  lives  to  him.  Mark's  addition 
"and  for  the  Gospel's  sake"  is  likely,  as  in  8  :  35,  to  have  been  taken 
from  the  form  given  the  Master's  words  in  the  Apostolic  preaching, 
when  the  proclamation  of  his  teaching  tended  to  exalt  the  Gospel  to  a 
level  with  himself.  Luke  fails  to  add  this  last  phrase,  though  he  has 
it  at  the  close  of  an  incident  earlier  in  this  period  of  his  Jerusalem 
journeys  (13  :  30);  while  he  also,  hke  Mark,  transforms  the  Master's 
words  "for  my  sake"  into  the  later  idea  of  "for  the  kingdom  of 
God's  sake  "(18  129). 

154 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


amazed;  and  they  that  followed  were  afraid.  And  he 
took  again  the  twelve,  and  began  to  tell  them  the 
SS-  things  that  were  to  happen  unto  him,  saying,  Be- 
hold, we  go  up  to  Jerusalem;  and  the  Son  of  man 
shall  be  delivered  unto  the  chief  priests  and  the 
scribes;  and  they  shall  condemn  him  to  death,  and 

(6)  Renewed  Announcement  of  the  Passion,  lo  :  32-34 

32.  They  were  amazed  (lit.  astonished,  startled,  unnerved)  .  .  . 
afraid:  As  they  neared  Jerusalem,  the  consciousness  of  what  the  city 
had  in  store  for  him  must  have  brought  upon  Jesus  a  fresh  sense  of  the 
awful  solemnity  of  the  situation  he  was  facing,  which  could  not  but 
have  shown  itself  in  his  demeanor  and  communicated  itself  to  those 
who  followed  in  his  company.  With  a  sense  of  what  was  resting 
upon  him,  he  places  himself  in  the  lead,  and  the  very  act,  simple  in 
itself,  brings  dread  upon  them;  for,  however  poorly  they  understood 
what  was  to  happen,  they  knew  enough  to  understand  a  crisis  of  some 
sort  was  impending.  Behind  them  came  the  straggling  crowd  who, 
understanding  less,  were  seized  with  real  fear  of  approaching  danger. 
Only  Mark  has  this  graphic  description  of  this  last  stage  of  their 
journey.  It  clearly  comes  from  Peter's  memory  and  gives  the  reason 
for  this  renewed  announcement  of  the  Passion,  for  the  Master  must 
once  more  attempt  to  make  clear  to  his  disciples'  slow  working  minds 
the  events  which  were  so  soon  to  take  place. 

33-34-  This  announcement  is  much  more  extended  than  either  of 
the  two  which  preceded  it  (8  :  31;  9  :  31).  It  is  still  the  Son  of  Man 
who  is  to  suffer,  but  the  stages  of  the  suffering  are  detailed.  There  is, 
as  in  ch.  9,  the  betrayal  into  the  hands  of  the  religious  rulers;  and 
their  rejection  of  him;  but  there  is  added  to  it  the  fact  that  they  shall 
deliver  him  unto  the  Gentiles,  and  then  is  given  an  almost  minute 
description  of  what  the  Romans  will  do  to  him — they  shall  mock 
him,  and  spit  upon  him,  and  scourge  him,  and  then  follows  the 
details  common  to  both  the  preceding  announcements,  although  here 
assigned  to  the  Civil  authorities,  they  shall  kill  him,  and  then  finally 
the  fact  with  which  both  the  announcements  close,  after  three  days 
he  shall  rise  again.  The  exact  correspondence  of  this  prediction  with 
what  actually  occurred  may  have  been  due,  to  a  certain  extent,  to  a 
recasting  of  the  Master's  words  in  the  light  of  the  events;  but  we 
must  remember  that,  on  the  one  hand,  the  Master  could  easily  have 
foreseen  that  the  death  which  was  to  come  would  have  to  beat  the 
hands  of  the  Roman  Government,  since  the  Jews  no  longer  had  the 
right  to  execute  the  death  sentences  which  they  themselves  pro- 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

34.  shall  deliver  him  unto  the  Gentiles:  and  they  shall 
mock  him,  and  shall  spit  upon  him,  and  shall  scourge 
him,  and  shall  kill  him;  and  after  three  days  he  shall 
rise  again. 

35.  And  there  come  near  unto  him  ^  James  and  John, 
the  sons  of  Zebedee,  saying  unto  him.  Teacher,  we 
would  that  thou  shouldest  do  for  us  whatsoever  we 

36.  shall  ask  of  thee.     And  he  said  unto  them.  What 

1  Jacob. 

nounced,  that  scourging  would  be  an  almost  certain  accompaniment 
of  the  execution,  and  that  mocking  would  be  a  most  probable  one,  in 
view  of  his  claim  to  be  the  Expected  King  of  the  Jews.  On  the  other 
hand,  we  must  not  forget  that,  in  the  inability  humanly  to  foresee  the 
decision  of  the  Roman  Governor,  the  statement  that  Death  would 
issue  at  all  was  as  clear  a  prediction  as  that  it  would  be  followed  by  a 
resurrection  (Gould,  ad.  loc).  Matthew's  explicit  statement  of  the 
form  of  the  death  and  that  the  rising  would  be  definitely  on  the 
third  day  (20  :  19)  are  doubtless  read  back  into  the  words.  Luke 
closes  the  prediction  with  the  statement,  which  seems  to  be  implied 
by  the  silence  of  Matthew  and  Mark,  that  the  disciples  failed  to 
comprehend  even  this  final  announcement,  as  they  had  the  other  two 
(18:34). 

(7)  The  Ambitions  Request  of  James  and  John,  10  :  35-45 

35-37-  James  and  John:  Matthew  states  that  it  was  the  Mother 
of  these  two  disciples  who  made  the  request  in  their  behalf  (20  :  20). 
If  this  incident  followed  upon  the  Master's  solemn  and  explicit 
announcement  of  the  tragic  events  which  were  close  before  them — 
as  there  seems  to  be  no  reason  to  doubt  it  did — it  not  only  confirms 
Luke's  statement  (18  :  34)  that  the  prediction  failed  to  penetrate 
their  understanding,  but  gives  us  a  new  idea  of  the  persistent  Na- 
tionalism of  their  Messianic  expectations,  which,  in  spite  of  the 
spiritual  conception  of  their  Master's  Messiahship  to  which  they  had 
come,  could  move  along  with  the  impression  they  must  have  had 
of  at  least  the  foreboding  nature  of  the  impending  experiences.  This 
Nationalism  had  doubtless  been  nourished  by  the  promise  the  Master 
had  just  made  of  the  rewards  which  were  to  come  to  his  disciples  for 
the  sacrifices  they  had  made  for  his  sake  (see  notes  on  vs.  29-31, 
and  note  the  addition  given  in  Matthew's  record,  19  :  28),  the  spiritual 
character  and  conditions  of  which,  however,  they  had  failed  to  com- 

156 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


37.  would  ye  that  I  should  do  for  you?  And  they  said 
unto  him,  Grant  unto  us  that  we  may  sit,  one  on  thy 
right  hand,  and  one  on  thy  left  hand,  in  thy  glory. 

38.  But  Jesus  said  unto  them.  Ye  know  not  what  ye  ask. 
Are  ye  able  to  drink  the  cup  that  I  drink?  or  to  be 
baptized  with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptized  with? 

prehend,  and  was  a  new  expression  of  the  ambitions  which  had  led 
them  recently,  on  the  way  to  Capernaum,  to  dispute  among  them- 
selves who  was  the  greatest  (9  :  34).  That  this  request  should  come 
from  two  of  the  three  disciples  who  had  been  drawn  into  close  intimacy 
with  the  Master  (cf.  5  :  37;  9  :  2)  is  all  the  more  distressing.  On  thy 
right  hand  .  .  .  left  hand,  in  thy  glory  (Matthew  renders  it  "thy 
kingdom,"  20  :  21) — the  places  of  honor  at  the  side  of  a  king  (i  Kings 
2  :  19;  Ps.  iio  :  i;  Acts  7  :  5sf.).  Most  probably,  his  definite  promise 
to  the  disciples  that  they  should  sit  on  twelve  thrones,  judging  the 
twelve  tribes  of  Israel,  when  Jesus  should  sit  on  "the  throne  of  his 
glory"  (Matt.  19  :  28),  had  stirred  in  them  the  wish  to  have  the 
thrones  of  honor  assigned  to  them,  which,  however,  would  carry  with 
them  the  seats  of  honor  at  the  table  of  his  kingdom  (Lk.  13  :  29; 
22  :  29f.). 

38-40.  Are  ye  able  to  drink  the  cup  ...  be  baptized  with  the 
baptism?  He  does  not  denounce  their  self-seeking  petition,  but 
reminds  them  of  the  conditions  it  involves.  The  rewards  which 
were  to  come  to  them  for  their  sacrifices  were  to  bring  with  them 
persecutions  (ver.  30);  the  thrones  and  the  banquet  seats  which  were 
to  be  theirs  at  the  consummation  of  his  kingdom  were  to  be  given  them 
only  as  they  had  followed  him  (Matt.  19  :  28),  and  that  following 
was  to  take  them  with  him  through  all  the  testing  trials  that  were  to 
come  upon  him  (Lk.  22  :  28-30).  The  banquet  cup  that  they  had  in 
mind  (Gen.  40  :  iif.)  was  to  be  also  a  cup  of  sorrow  and  suffering 
(14  :36);  the  initiation  into  his  kingdom  which  they  were  thinking 
of  was  to  be  a  baptism  whose  shuddering  woe  would  oppress  and 
afBict  his  soul  until  it  was  accomplished  (Lk.  12  150).  Were  they 
equal  to  all  this?  Their  response.  We  are  able,  represented  their 
ignorant  confidence  as  to  the  outcome  of  the  Master's  mission  which 
was  due  to  their  persistent  Nationalism  (cf.  Lk.  19  :  11;  Acts  1:6). 
The  cup  .  .  .  ye  shall  drmk:  For  James,  this  was  fulfilled  in  his 
martyrdom  early  in  the  experience  of  the  Jerusalem  Church  (Acts 
12  :  if.),  and,  in  his  brother's  case,  most  probably  in  his  condemna- 
tion by  the  Emperor  Domitian  to  exile  in  the  Isle  of  Patmos  (Rev. 
I  :  9.  See  art.  on  John  the  Apostle,  Standard  Bible  Dictionary). 
The  Master's  words,  in  view  of  the  general  conditions  he  has  in  mind 

157 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

39.  And  they  said  unto  him,  We  are  able.  And  Jesus 
said  unto  them,  The  cup  that  I  drink  ye  shall  drink; 
and  with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptized  withal  shall 

40.  ye  be  baptized:  but  to  sit  on  my  right  hand  or  on  my 
left  hand  is  not  mine  to  give;  but  it  is  for  them  for 

41.  whom  it  hath  been  prepared.  And  when  the  ten 
heard  it,  they  began  to  be  moved  with  indignation 

on  which  their  rewards  were  to  be  granted  (see  notes  on  ver.  38), 
cannot  be  pressed  to  mean  that  they  were  to  suffer  specifically  a 
martyr's  death.  Is  not  mine  to  give  but  ...  for  whom  it  hath 
been  prepared  (Matthew,  who  is  not  primary  here,  adds  "of  my 
Father,"  20:23):  These  preferments  do  not  come  by  arbitrary 
assignments,  even  from  himself,  but  in  the  way  of  that  which  is 
prepared  for  those  who  have  fitted  themselves  to  receive  it  (cf. 
Matt.  25  :  31-46). 

41.  The  ten  .  .  .  moved  with  indignation — not  in  moral  criti- 
cism of  the  action  of  the  two  disciples,  but  in  bitter  jealousy  at  the 
advantage  which  they  had  sought  to  gain  over  the  rest  (9  :  34). 

42-45.  Them — the  Ten,  though  the  remarks  were  doubtless 
addressed  to  them  all.  Accoimted  to  rule  (lit.  reputed  to  nile,  seem 
to  rule) — not  that  their  rule  was  not  actual,  but  that  it  was  not  ideal. 
It  did  not  rest  upon  their  inherent  ability  to  rule,  to  say  nothing  of 
their  moral  qualifications  for  ruhng.  Lord  it  over  them  (lit.  bring 
under  one's  dominion,  or  mastery,  cf.  Acts  19  :  16) — as  a  despotic  and 
tyrannical  course  of  action,  this  is  almost  a  natural  consequence  of 
their  lack  of  the  ideal  quahties  of  rule.  Great  ones — a  general  term, 
viewed  from  the  point  of  rank,  as  the  preceding  one — "those  who  are 
accounted  to  rule" — was,  viewed  from  the  point  of  function.  Exer- 
cise (ht.  wield)  authority  over  them — with  the  same  lack  of  moral 
consideration  as  was  involved  in  the  "lording  it  over  them."  It  is 
not  so  among  you — not  that  this  was  not  the  spirit  of  which  they 
partook — for  it  was:  but  that  it  was  not  the  spirit  created  in  their 
midst,  to  which  as  an  ideal  they  were  to  adhere.  On  the  contrary, 
they  are  to  understand,  as  he  had  already  taught  them  in  their  dispute 
about  greatness  among  themselves  (9  :  3 5-3 7)  >  that  true  greatness 
consists  in  wilhngness  to  minister  to  others'  needs  and  serve  the 
interests  of  all — to  which  he  adds,  as  the  highest  illustration  of  the 
principle  which  could  be  given,  the  object  which  he  had  set  before 
himself  in  his  own  mission — not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minis- 
ter, and  (ht.  and  so,  as  a  consequence  of  that  purpose,  and  as  involved 
in  it)  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many  (ht.  in  place  of  many) :  A 

158 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


42.  concerning  ^  James  and  John.  And  Jesus  called  them 
to  him,  and  saith  unto  them;  Ye  know  that  they  who 
are  accounted  to  rule  over  the  Gentiles  lord  it  over 
them;  and  their  great  ones  exercise  authority  over 

43.  them.  But  it  is  not  so  among  you:  but  whosoever 
would  become  great  among  you,  shall  be  your  ^  min- 

44.  ister;  and  whosoever  would  be  first  among  you,  shall 

45.  be  ^  servant  of  all.  For  the  Son  of  man  also  came  not 
to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister,  and  to  give 
his  life  a  ransom  for  many. 

46.  And  they  come  to  Jericho:  and  as  he  went  out  from 
Jericho,  with  his  disciples  and  a  great  multitude,  the 
son  of  Timaeus,  Bartimaeus,  a  blind  beggar,  was  sitting 

47-  by  the  way  side.  And  when  he  heard  that  it  was 
Jesus  the  Nazarene,  he  began  to  cry  out,  and  say, 

1  Jacob.  2  servant.  3  Grk.  bondservant,  or  slave. 


ransom  was  a  payment  for  the  release  of  bondmen  (Num.  3  :  49), 
or  of  captives  (Isa.  45  :  13),  or  for  the  recovery  of  sold  land  (Lev. 
25  :  24),  or  for  the  redemption  of  a  life  (Ex.  21  :  30).  This,  with 
I  Tim.  2  :  6,  is  the  only  use  of  the  word  in  the  New  Testament,  and 
means  that  the  Master's  hfe  was  to  be  given  for  the  release  from  the 
bondage  of  sin  of  the  lives  of  many  (cf.  Rom.  3  :  23f.,  Gal.  3  :  13; 
Eph.  I  :  7;  Tit.  2  :  14;  i  Pet.  i  :  18;  Heb.  9  :  12-14).  That  this 
bondage  of  sin  would,  in  the  end,  result  in  a  death  more  significant 
than  that  of  the  body  may  rightly  be  inferred  from  the  Master's 
words  in  8  :  35-37;  9  :  43-48;  so  that  the  giving  of  his  Hfe  for  their 
freedom  from  sin  would  be  in  fact  a  giving  of  it  to  prevent  the  loss  of 
their  higher  spiritual  lives.  (See  Hogg,  Christ's  Message  of  the  King- 
dom, pp.  183-186.) 

{8)  Arrival  at  Jericho  and  the  Healing  of  the  Blind  Beggar,  10  :  46-52 

46,  47-  Jericho  (Possibly,  ''City  of  fragrance,''  or  City  of  the  Moon- 
God),  in  the  Old  Testament  sometimes  called  "City  of  palm-trees," 
Deut.  34  -.y,  Jud.  i  :  16;  3  :  13;  2  Chron.  28  :  15— an  important 
city,  some  5  miles  North  of  the  Dead  Sea,  about  15  miles  Northeast 
from  Jerusalem,  and  6  miles  West  of  the  Jordan.    It  lay  820  ft.  below 

159 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

48.  Jesus,  thou  son  of  David,  have  mercy  on  me.  And 
many  rebuked  him,  that  he  should  hold  his  peace: 
but  he  cried  out  the  more  a  great  deal.  Thou  son  of 

49.  David,  have  mercy  on  me.  And  Jesus  stood  still, 
and  said.  Call  ye  him.  And  they  call  the  blind  man, 
saying  unto  him,  Be  of  good  cheer:  rise,  he  calleth 

50.  thee.    And  he,  casting  away  his  garment,  sprang  up, 

the  sea  level  and  was  located  in  a  region  of  great  fertility,  but  of 
enervating  heat.  The  Herodian  family  made  much  of  it  in  fortifica- 
tions and  buildings,  and  it  was  there  that  Herod  the  Great  died.  It 
never  became  Hellenized,  being  saved  from  this,  perhaps,  by  the  new 
city  of  Phasaelis,  which  Herod  built  to  the  North  of  it  and  which, 
doubtless,  attracted  the  newer  life  to  itself.  A  great  (Ut.  sufficient, 
here  better  rendered  considerable)  multitude:  This  was  not  neces- 
sarily made  up  wholly  of  the  distinctive  following  of  the  Master,  but 
consisted  largely  of  the  general  crowd  of  Passover  pilgrim.s,  which  he 
would  meet  at  this  place  and  of  which  his  own  band  of  disciples  and 
followers  would  form  a  part.  The  son  of  Timaeus,  which  is  Mark's 
interpretation  of  the  following  Aramaic  name.  Bar  (Son  of)  timaeus. 
Neither  Matthew  nor  Luke,  who  are  not  primary  here,  give  any 
name;  while  Matthew  speaks  of  there  being  two  persons,  instead  of 
one,  perhaps  having  confused  this  miracle  with  one  which  he  gives 
earlier  (9  :  27).  Luke  further  records  the  incident  as  having  occurred 
as  they  were  drawing  near  the  city  (Matt.  20  :  29f.;  Lk.  18  :  35). 
Sitting  by  the  wayside — possibly  just  outside  the  gate,  where  he 
could  attract  the  attention  of  those  who  entered  and  left  the  city. 
When  he  heard  .  .  .  Jesus  the  Nazarene:  Luke  explains  how  he 
came  by  this  information,  through  the  tramping  past  him  of  the 
crowd  and  his  inquiry  as  to  what  was  taking  place  (18  :  36f.).  Thou 
son  of  David — not  necessarily  indicating  the  personal  conviction 
of  the  beggar,  though  he  doubtless  shared  in  the  common  belief  in 
Jesus  as  a  wonder  worker.  More  probably,  this  title  was  caught  up 
from  some  of  the  people  in  the  crowd — followers  of  the  Master,  who 
were  still  persuaded  that  he  was  soon  to  proclaim  himself  the  Na- 
tion's Messiah  (cf.  Lk.  19  :  11). 

48-50.  The  fact  that,  when  he  persisted  in  his  cry,  many  rebuked 
him,  that  he  should  hold  his  peace,  would  seem  to  accord  with 
the  popular  feeling  that,  while  this  was  in  the  nature  of  a  Messianic 
procession  to  the  Holy  City,  it  must  not  be  interrupted  with  a  public 
proclamation  of  the  Messiahship  before  the  city  was  reached.  So, 
on  the  other  hand,  would  they  be  in  accord  with  this  Messianic  spirit 

160 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

51.  and  came  to  Jesus.  And  Jesus  answered  him,  and 
said,  What  wilt  thou  that  I  should  do  unto  thee? 
And  the  blind  man  said  unto  him,  Rabboni,  that 

52.  I  may  receive  my  sight.  And  Jesus  said  unto  him, 
Go  thy  way;  thy  faith  hath  made  thee  whole.  And 
straightway  he  received  his  sight,  and  followed  him 
in  the  way. 

4.  The  Messianic  Work  in  Jerusalem,  chs.  11-13 

11.  And  when  they  draw  nigh  unto  Jerusalem,  unto 
Bethphage  and  Bethany,  at  the  mount  of  Olives,  he 

when  they  gave  him  their  encouraging  summons,  Be  of  good  cheer, 
he  calleth  thee  (given  alone  by  Mark),  when  Jesus  himself  stopped 
and  bade  them  bring  him  to  him. 

51,52.  Garment — the  outer  mantle.  What  wilt  thou?  The  persist- 
ency of  his  cry  and  the  eagerness  of  his  coming,  guided  though  it  was 
by  those  who  summoned  him  (cf.  Lk.  i8  :  40,)  showed,  not  only  his 
desire  for  help,  but  his  belief  that  it  could  be  given.  Jesus  will  bring 
such  faith  as  he  has  to  definite  expression  by  his  question.  Rab- 
boni— a  fuller  form  of  Rabbi,  a  common  address  of  respect.  It  was 
given  to  Jesus  during  his  ministry  by  those  outside  his  following 
(Jn.  3  :  2;  6  :  25),  as  well  as  by  his  disciples  (9  15;  11  :  21;  Matt.  26  : 
25,  49;  Jn.  I  :  38,  49).  John  interprets  it  as  meaning  "Teacher" 
(20  :  16).  Matthew  (20  :  33)  and  Luke  (18  :  41)  substitute  for  it 
here  "Lord."  (cf.  Dalman,  Words  of  Jesus,  pp.  324f.,  340).  Thy 
faith  hath  made  thee  whole  (Ht.  saved  thee.)  There  is  no  process  of 
healing  here,  as  in  the  cases  in  the  Decapolis  (7  :  ss)  and  at  Beth- 
saida  (8  :  23-25).  This  is  Jewish  region,  and  he  is  dealing  with  one 
whose  religious  ideas  are  not  clouded  by  paganism.  Followed  him 
in  the  way:  His  instant  cure  had  doubtless  brought  him  into  the  Mes- 
sianic enthusiasm  of  the  multitude,  and  he  follows  in  the  company 
of  Jesus,  not  merely  out  of  gratitude  for  what  had  been  done  to  him, 
but  with  a  conviction  wrought  by  that  cure,  that  what  doubt- 
less was  spoken  on  all  sides  about  his  being  the  coming  king  was 
true(cf.  Lk.  18  143) . 

(i)  The  Public  Entry  into  Jerusalem,  11 :  i-ii 

II  :  1-3.  Bethphage  (probably,  House  of  figs) — an  unidentified 
village,  on  the  road  from  Jericho.     According  to  the  Talmud,  it 

161 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

2.  sendeth  two  of  his  disciples,  and  saith  unto  them, 
Go  your  way  into  the  village  that  is  over  against  you: 
and  straightway  as  ye  enter  into  it,  ye  shall  find  a 
colt  tied,  whereon  no  man  ever  yet  sat;  loose  him, 

3.  and  bring  him.  And  if  any  one  say  unto  you.  Why 
do  ye  this?  say  ye.  The  Lord  hath  need  of  him;  and 

4.  straightway  he  ^  will  send  him  ^  back  hither.  And 
they  went  away,  and  found  a  colt  tied  at  the  door 

1  Grk.  sendeth.  2  again. 

lay  just  outside  the  city  boundary  of  Jerusalem  (Dalman,  Words  of 
Jesus,  p.  68).  Bethany  (probably,  House  of  dates) — a  small  village 
on  the  East  slope  of  the  Mount  of  Olives,  somewhat  farther  from 
Jerusalem  (cf.  Jn.  11  :  18),  on  the  same  road  from  Jericho  as  Beth- 
phage.  In  the  statement  (which  is  practically  repeated  by  Matthew 
21  :  I  and  Luke  19  :  29),  the  place  farthest  away  (Jerusalem)  is 
given  first,  as  indicating  the  general  terminus,  and  the  two  villages 
(Bethphage  and  Bethany),  as  marking  the  distance  which  had  been 
reached  in  its  direction.  As  the  latter  of  these  villages  was  the  one 
to  which  they  had  now  come,  the  village  that  is  over  against  you 
was  doubtless  Bethphage,  being  so  described,  probably,  as  lying  over 
the  other  side  of  the  ascent  of  the  Mount.  According  to  John,  the 
giving  of  this  commission  occurred  on  the  morrow  after  their  arrival 
at  Bethany  (12  :  i,  12).  A  colt — the  young  of  either  a  horse  or  an 
ass.  Matthew,  who  cites  later  the  passage  from  Zechariah  9  :  9, 
gives  it  definitely  as  the  foal  of  an  ass  (21  :  2).  No  man  ever  yet  sat: 
This  may  have  been  read  back  into  the  Master's  instructions  from 
the  Apostolic  interpretation  of  the  event,  based  on  the  tradition 
regarding  the  sepulchre  as  given  in  Lk.  23  :  53,  and  on  the  general 
Old  Testament  idea  that  an  unused  animal  was  necessary  for  sacred 
purposes  (cf.  Num.  19  :  2;  Deut.  21  :  3).  At  the  same  time,  the  other 
details  of  foreknowledge  involved  in  this  story  do  not  make  this 
one  unnatural  or  unlikely.  (See  on  other  occasions  14  :  13;  Matt. 
17  :  27;  Jn.  I  :48).  Straightway  he  will  send  him  back  hither: 
Mark  alone  gives  this  as  part  of  the  answer  which  the  disciples  are 
to  make  in  case  of  protest  against  the  removal  of  the  colt.  Matthew 
refers  the  immediacy  of  action  to  the  owners  of  the  animals  in  letting 
them  be  taken  (21  :  3).    Luke  makes  no  reference  to  any  action. 

4-6.  The  details  of  the  expedition  are  furnished  by  Mark  alone. 
Matthew  contents  himself  with  saying  that  the  disciples,  having 
found  things  as  the  Master  had  told  them  they  would,  carried  out  his 
command  (21  :6);  Luke  compresses  his  record  of  what  they  dis- 

162 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

5.  without  in  the  open  street;  and  they  loose  him.    And 
certain  of  them  that  stood  there  said  unto  them,  What 

6.  do  ye,  loosing  the  colt?   And  they  said  unto  them  even 

7.  as  Jesus  had  said:  and  they  let  them  go.     And  they 
bring  the  colt  unto  Jesus,  and  cast  on  him  their  gar- 

8.  ments;  and  he  sat  upon  him.    And  many  spread  their 
garments  upon  the  way;  and  others  branches,  which 

covered  into  the  statement  that  it  was  as  Jesus  had  described  it  (19  : 
32),  and  then  practically  follows  Mark  in  his  statement  of  how  they 
accomplished  their  commission  (19  :  33-3 5a).  At  the  door — of 
the  house,  but  without  {i.e.  outside  the  courtyard  of  the  house) 
in  the  open  street  (lit.  in  the  roundabout  road) — the  narrow  alley 
which,  in  the  closely  built  villages,  was  the  only  way  around  the  house 
(see  art.  Street,  Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  Vol.  IV).  There  the 
colt  had  been  tied,  to  have  it  out  of  the  way  of  the  trafiSc  which 
passed  along  the  congested  street  in  front  of  the  house.  These  minute 
details  make  probable  that  Peter  was  one  of  the  two  disciples  sent 
on  the  errand  and  is  giving  here  his  personal  reminiscence  (cf.  Lk, 
22:8). 

7-10.  Spread  their  garments  (outer  cloaks)  upon  the  way:  This 
was  an  impulsive  act  of  homage  (cf.  2  Kings  9  :  13),  which  was 
doubtless  suggested  by  the  spreading  of  cloaks  upon  the  colt  in  place 
of  a  saddle-cloth,  and  led  in  its  turn  to  the  further  hurried  gathering 
of  branches  (lit.  layers  to  be  trodden  or  slept  upon) — leaves,  reeds, 
leafy  twigs  (Matthew  confines  them  to  "branches  from  the  trees," 
21  :8)  from  the  fields  along  the  road,  to  make  a  pathway  for  this 
Messianic  Ruler.  They  that  went  before  (so  also  Matthew,  21  :g) 
— probably  the  multitude  referred  to  in  Jn.  12  :  i2f.  who,  hearing 
of  the  expected  Messianic  proclamation,  had  come  out  with  palm 
branches  to  greet  the  coming  King  and,  meeting  the  procession 
which  had  formed,  turned  around  and  led  it  on  its  way.  They  that 
followed  would  be  the  multitude  that  had  accompanied  Jesus  on 
the  road,  augmented  by  the  villagers  of  Bethany  and  Bethphage. 
Then,  as  the  procession  descended  the  Western  slope  of  Olivet  towards 
Jerusalem  (Lk.  19  :  37),  the  two  crowds  united  in  shouting  Hosanna 
(lit.  Save  [us] !) ;  blessed  is  he  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord. 
This  is  taken  from  an  invocation  in  Ps.  118  (ver.  25f.),  one  of  the 
group  of  six  Praise  Psalms  (113-118)  which  were  sung  at  Passover, 
Pentecost,  Tabernacles,  and  Dedication.  It  was  of  a  character  to  be 
associated  with  the  people's  hope  of  National  restoration,  and  would 
easily  suggest  itself  in  the  circumstances  of  this  triumphal  procession. 

163 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

9.  they  had  cut  from  the  fields.    And  they  that  went  be- 
fore, and  they  that  followed,  cried,  Hosanna;  Blessed 

10.  is  he  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord:  Blessed  is 
the  kingdom  that  cometh,  the  kingdom  of  our  father 
David:  Hosanna  in  the  highest. 

11.  And  he  entered  into  Jerusalem,  into  the  temple;  and 
when  he  had  looked  round  about  upon  all  things,  it 
being  now  eventide,  he  went  out  unto  Bethany  with 
the  twelve. 


Matthew's  phrase,  "Hosanna  to  the  Son  of  David,"  21  : 9,  is  prob- 
ably added  from  later  Jewish-Christian  liturgies,  Swete,  ad.  loc.  Luke's 
addition,  "Peace  in  heaven  and  glory  in  the  highest,"  19  :  38,  may  be 
his  paraphrasing  of  the  closing  refrain  in  Matthew  and  Mark,  Plum- 
mer,  ad.  loc.  Blessed  is  the  kingdom  that  cometh  ...  of  our 
father  David — given  only  by  Mark — was  doubtless  added  by  those 
in  the  crowd  most  confident  of  Messianic  developments;  while  all 
united  in  the  outburst  which  it  may  have  prompted,  Hosamia  in 
the  highest — which  has  no  local  reference,  but  means  simply  an  em- 
phatic Hosanna. 

II.  Luke  adds  to  the  narrative  of  the  entry  a  protest  from  the 
Pharisees  (19  :  39f.;  cf.  Jn,  12  :  19),  and  the  Master's  lament  over 
Jerusalem  (19  :  41-44;  cf,  13  :  34f.),  both  of  them  probable  incidents 
in  the  event.  Matthew  records  how  profoundly  the  city  was  moved 
and  the  reply  of  the  enthusiastic  multitudes  to  the  inquiry  made  on 
every  side  as  to  who  this  personage  was  (21  :  lof.) — an  ignorance  as 
to  his  personahty  quite  behevable  on  the  part  of  the  pilgrim  multi- 
tudes gathered  from  all  parts  of  the  Diaspora.  Mark  contents  him- 
self with  a  simple  statement  of  what  Jesus  did  upon  entering  the  city. 
Entered  .  .  .  into  the  Temple.  Matthew  makes  the  cleansing  of 
the  Temple  to  have  taken  place  at  this  time  (21  :  12-17).  Mark 
states  more  accurately  that  it  being  now  late  in  the  day  (eventide), 
he  simply  looked  round  about  upon  all  things,  which  he  saw  there, 
and  went  out  unto  Bethany  with  the  twelve.  In  view  of  his  visits 
to  the  city  at  the  Feasts  of  Pentecost,  Tabernacles  and  Dedication 
(Jn.  5:1;  7:2,  14;  10  :  22f.),  this  sight  could  not  have  given  him 
his  first  knowledge  of  the  return  of  the  Temple  traffic  from  his  cast- 
ing of  it  out  at  his  first  public  Passover  (Jn.  2  :  13-16).  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  he  did  not  go  up  to  the  Temple  to  inform  himself  of  what  was 
going  on  within  its  walls.  This  he  already  well  knew.  It  was  the 
procession  which,  in  its  enthusiasm,  had  brought  him  to  its  doors,  pos- 

164 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

12.  And  on  the  morrow,  when  they  were  come  out  from 

13.  Bethany,  he  hungered.  And  seemg  a  fig  tree  afar 
off  having  leaves,  he  came,  if  haply  he  might  find 
anything  thereon:  and  when  he  came  to  it,  he  found 
nothing  but  leaves;  for  it  was  not  the  season  of  figs. 

14.  And  he  answered  and  said  unto  it,  No  man  eat  fruit 
from  thee  henceforward  for  ever.  And  his  disciples 
heard  it. 

sibly  expecting  some  Messianic  proclamation  then  and  there.  But 
his  announcement  of  his  claims  was  to  be  full  and  complete,  there- 
fore deliberate  and  only  after  the  rulers,  as  well  as  the  people,  had 
become  thoroughly  conscious  of  his  presence  in  their  midst.  We  are 
impressed  with  the  growing  deliberateness  of  his  action  during  this 
last  journey  to  Jerusalem.  The  burdening  consciousness  of  the  sac- 
rificial consummation  of  his  mission  which,  as  the  journey  progressed, 
expressed  itself  in  the  strangeness  of  his  personal  bearing  (10  :  32), 
as  well  as  in  the  plainness  of  his  speech  (10  :  45),  seemed,  as  he  neared 
the  city,  to  give  way  to  a  Messianic  unreserve  that  found  its  climax 
in  this  deliberately  undertaken  and  accomplished  public  entry. 
The  eternal  issues  which  were  now  fully  and  finally  before  the  reli- 
gious rulers  of  the  Nation  could  not  be  presented  to  them  hastily 
and  with  the  compelling  crush  of  the  multitude  behind  them;  for 
they  were  not  political  issues,  but  spiritual,  and  were  to  be  settled, 
not  by  the  impulses  of  action,  but  by  the  deUberate  decisions  of  the 
will.  If  the  entry  was  in  itself  a  presentation  of  his  claims,  it  was 
almost  necessitated  by  the  Messianic  enthusiasm  of  the  multitude 
which  had  accompanied  him  up  to  the  city  and  would  go  with  him 
through  its  gates.  Howev^er  much  their  ideas  differed  from  his,  he 
could  not  refuse  their  homage  without  taking  all  significance  and 
meaning  away  from  his  claims  in  the  eyes  of  the  Rulers  before  whom 
ultimately  they  must  come. 

(2)  The  Barren  Fig  Tree,  11  :  12-14 

1 2-14.  On  the  morrow — Monday  of  Holy  Week.  From  Bethany: 
It  is  evident  from  Luke's  repeated  statements  (21  :  37;  22  :  39), 
confirmed  by  John  (18  :  2),  that  the  Bethany  to  which  Jesus  went 
the  evening  before  (ver.  11)  and  from  which  he  was  now  returning 
included  the  mountain  tract  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  village,  to 
which  its  name  was  given  (cf.  Lk.  24  :  50  with  Acts  i  :  12),  and  that 
the  night's  rest  was  taken  in  the  open  air  and  not  as  the  guest  of  a 

i6s 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

15.  And  they  come  to  Jerusalem:  and  he  entered  into 
the  temple,  and  began  to  cast  out  them  that  sold  and 
them  that  bought  in  the  temple,  and  overthrew  the 
tables  of  the  money-changers,  and  the  seats  of  them 

hospitable  home.  This  gave  him  privacy  for  meditation  and  prayer 
(cf.  14  :  26, 32)  and  possibly  accounts  for  the  fact  that  as  he  came  into 
the  city  in  the  morning,  he  hungered.  Although  people  of  the  East 
do  not  breakfast  until  after  an  hour  or  so  of  work,  we  can  understand 
how  the  sight  of  a  fig  tree  in  foliage  and  therefore  promising  fruit 
awakened  in  Jesus  the  sense  of  hunger.  If  haply  (lit.  therefore) 
he  might  find  anything  thereon:  The  presence  of  the  leaves  gave 
every  reason  to  expect  some  of  the  first  crop  of  small  and  delicately 
flavored  figs  (cf.  Song  Sol.  2  :  13;  Jer.  24  :  2).  For  it  was  not  the 
season  of  figs :  The  leaf  buds  and  the  small  figs  with  them  appear 
about  the  end  of  March;  the  larger  fruit  is  not  ripe  till  August;  and 
though  the  greater  portion  of  the  smaller  fruit  falls  to  the  ground  with 
the  spring  winds  (cf.  Rev.  6  :  13),  there  is  always  left  on  normal 
trees  a  portion  to  ripen.  But  here,  apparently,  was  a  tree  whose 
early  fruit  had  entirely  disappeared,  and  whose  only  possession  was 
foliage,  since  the  season  for  the  later  and  larger  fruit  had  not  yet 
come.  (See  art.  Fig  Tree,  Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the  Bible  [Single 
Vol.  Ed.].)  The  Master's  condemnation  of  the  tree  was  that  it  was 
not  normal.  Against  every  reasonable  expectation,  it  had  failed  to 
retain  even  a  portion  of  the  fruit  it  had  originally  possessed,  though 
outwardly  it  gave  every  appearance  of  doing  so.  From  the  parable 
of  the  fig  tree  which  Luke  records  him  as  having  spoken  on  his  recent 
Jerusalem  journeys  (13  :  6-9),  it  is  clear  that  the  Master  saw  in  the 
tree  an  illustration  of  the  Jewish  Nation  in  its  relations  to  God — as 
having  every  outward  appearance  of  possessing  real  religion,  and 
being  wholly  without  it.  In  his  condemnation  of  the  tree,  he  voiced 
his  denunciation  of  the  Nation's  deceptive  religious  life. 

(j)  The  Cleansing  of  the  Temple,  11 :  15-19 

15.  Entered  into  the  temple — to  carry  out  in  action  the  judg- 
ment he  must  already  in  himself  have  passed  upon  the  defiant  return 
of  the  sacrilegious  trafi5c  to  the  House  of  God  (cf.  Jn.  2  :  13-16), 
Them  that  sold  .  .  .  bought :  The  traffic  consisted,  not  only  in  the 
sale  and  purchase  of  sacrificial  animals  (cf.  Jn.  2  :  14)  and  the  ex- 
change of  foreign  money  for  the  sacred  half  shekel  of  the  Temple, 
but  also,  most  likely,  in  the  furnishing  of  all  the  provisions  necessary 
for  the  sacrifices  and  ritual  of  the  Temple  (wine,  oil,  salt,  etc.),  and 
of  the  right  kind  of  money  for  the  purchase  of  these  animals  and 
provisions.    It  also  included  the  changing  of  the  votive  offerings  of 

166 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

1 6.  that  sold  the  doves;  and  he  would  not  suffer  that  any 

17.  man  should  carry  a  vessel  through  the  temple.  And 
he  taught,  and  said  unto  them,  Is  it  not  written, 
My  house  shall  be  called  a  house  of  prayer  for  all 
the  nations?  but  ye  have  made  it  a  den  of  robbers. 

18.  And  the  chief  priests  and  the  scribes  heard  it,  and 
sought  how  they  might  destroy  him:  for  they  feared 
him,  for  all  the  multitude  was  astonished  at  his  teach- 
ing. 

proselytes  and  foreign  Jews  into  Temple  coin  (Edersheim,  Messiah^ 
Vol.  I,  p.  368f.)-  Whether  the  expulsion  of  the  traffickers  was  ac- 
complished by  the  same  means  as  at  the  first  cleansing  (Jn.  2  :  15), 
we  are  not  told,  but  the  tables  of  the  money  changers  were  over- 
thrown, as  then,  and  instead  of  a  mere  command  to  those  that  sold 
the  doves  to  take  them  away  (Jn.  2  :  16),  he  overthrew  their  seats, 
or  benches,  on  which  they  sat  in  transacting  their  business. 

16,  17.  Carry  a  vessel  through  the  temple  (given  only  by  Mark) : 
The  custom  had  grown  up,  in  spite  of  its  prohibition  by  the  Jewish 
authorities,  for  those  who  were  carrying  goods  or  implements  to  pass 
through  the  Temple  area  as  a  short  cut  between  the  city  and  the 
Mount  of  Olives  (Swete,  ad.  loc).  This  irreverence  also  Jesus  stopped, 
and  recalled  to  the  traffickers  the  Scripture  passage  (Isa.  56  :  7)  where 
the  House  upon  the  Holy  Mountain  was  called  "My  house  of 
prayer."  God's  designation  of  it  they  had  ignored  by  turning  it 
into  a  den  of  robbers,  an  accusation  which  condemned,  not  only  the 
fact,  but  the  character  of  the  trade  they  carried  on.  Obviously,  the 
spirit  of  this  cleansing  differs  from  that  which  characterized  the 
cleansing  at  the  first  Passover.  The  earher  act  was  that  of  a  religious 
Reformer  at  the  beginning  of  his  work,  who  has  in  view  Israel  itself, 
at  the  heart  of  its  religious  life  (Jn.  2  :  16,  20),  and  sees  the  bearing 
of  his  act  upon  his  own  fate  in  the  event  of  the  rejection  of  his  mission 
(Jn.  2  :  19).  The  later  act  was  of  a  broader  nature,  having  in  view 
Israel's  relation  to  the  outside  nations  (ver.  17).  It  was  the  act  of  a 
Reformer  at  the  end  of  his  work,  expressing  his  final  judgment  upon 
the  evil's  defiant  ignoring  of  his  former  condemnation  of  its  existence. 

18.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  murderous  anger  which  it  aroused 
in  the  Rulers,  unlike  the  milder  action  which  issued  from  the  earher 
act  (Jn.  2  :  18).  Doubtless,  the  later  demand  upon  him  by  these 
Rulers  (vs.  27-33)  ^^s  prompted  by  this  deed,  but  it  was  a  demand  for 
his  authority  in  doing  this  and  all  the  other  things  of  his  ministry, 

167 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

19.  And  every  evening  ^  he  went  forth  out  of  the  city. 

20.  And  as  they  passed  by  in  the  morning,  they  saw  the 

21.  fig  tree  withered  away  from  the  roots.  And  Peter 
calling  to  remembrance  saith  imto  him,  Rabbi,  behold, 
the  fig  tree  which  thou  cursedst  is  withered  away. 

22.  And  Jesus  answering  saith  unto  them,  Have  faith 

1  Some  MSS.  read  they. 

and  not  merely  for  a  sign  to  justify  him  in  this  one  public  act  he  had 
performed  (Jn.  2:18).  It  was  as  though  they  would  go  to  the  root  of 
all  the  contention  between  themselves  and  him;  while  his  answer 
(vs.  30-33)  is  in  judgment  upon  their  past  behavior  towards  the 
spiritual  message  God  had  sent  to  them  in  the  ministry  of  his  great 
Forerunner  now  closed,  rather  than  in  challenge  upon  their  future 
attitude  towards  the  spiritual  claims  of  his  own  mission.  Luke  con- 
denses the  record  of  the  cleansing  itself,  but  adds  to  it  a  statement  of 
Jesus'  daily  teaching  in  the  Temple,  which  he  seems  to  make  the 
reason  for  the  determination  of  the  Rulers  to  kill  him  (19  :  47f.). 
Matthew  parallels  Mark  in  his  narrative  of  the  cleansing,  but  goes 
beyond  Luke  in  stating  that  Jesus  carried  on  a  general  healing  work 
in  the  Temple,  and  that  it  was  because  of  this  and  the  homage  paid 
him  by  the  children  that  the  Rulers  were  angered,  but  only  to  the 
extent  of  a  protest  against  the  children's  behavior. 

19.  Every  evening  (lit.  when  evening  came)  he  went  forth  out  of 
the  city — to  his  quiet  resting  place  on  the  Mount  of  OHves  (Lk. 
21  :37). 

{4)  The  Withering  of  the  Fig  Tree,  11 :  20-25 

20-21 .  In  the  morning — Tuesday  of  Holy  Week.  Withered  away 
from  the  roots — a  complete  destruction  of  its  life,  as  following  the 
comprehensive  denunciation  of  its  falseness.  Matthew  represents 
the  withering  as  having  taken  place  immediately,  and  the  whole 
transaction  as  having  occurred  on  Tuesday  morning.  Luke  gives  no 
record  at  all  of  the  event.  Calling  to  remembrance :  The  disciples  do 
not  seem  to  have  expected  anything  more  to  result  from  the  Master's 
denunciation  than  a  continued  barrenness  of  the  tree.  But  as  the 
tree  in  its  deceptive  appearance  was  an  illustration  of  the  falseness  of 
Judaism,  so  must  it  be  in  the  punishment  which  its  pretensions 
brought  upon  it — and  the  punishment  of  false  living  is  not  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  falseness  of  living  but  the  loss  of  life  itself. 

22-25.  Have  faith  in  God:  The  astonishment  shown  by  the  disci- 
ples at  what  had  happened  to  the  tree  evidently  indicated  to  the 

i63 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

23.  in  God.  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  Whosoever  shall  say 
unto  this  mountain,  Be  thou  taken  up  and  cast  into 
the  sea;  and  shall  not  doubt  in  his  heart,  but  shall  be- 
lieve that  what  he  saith  cometh  to  pass;  he  shall  have 

24.  it.  Therefore  I  say  unto  you,  All  things  whatsoever 
ye  pray  and  ask  for,  believe  that  ye  ^  receive  them, 

25.  and  ye  shall  have  them.  And  whensoever  ye  stand 
praying,  forgive,  if  ye  have  aught  against  any  one; 
that  your  Father  also  who  is  in  heaven  may  forgive 
you  your  trespasses.- 

1  Grk.  receivelh. 

2  Many  MSS.  add  verse  26,  But  if  ye  do  not  forgive,  neither  will  your  Father  who 
is  in  heaven  forgive  your  trespasses. 

Master  the  unlikelihood  of  their  appreciating  the  lesson  it  was  in- 
tended to  convey.  He  contents  himself,  therefore,  with  taking  up  the 
incident  at  the  point  where  it  had  impressed  them — the  unexpected- 
ness of  the  results,  and  impressing  upon  them  that  all  results  depend 
upon  the  spiritual  relation  of  the  soul  with  God.  If  there  be  a  real 
dependence  upon  the  power  of  God,  that  power  may  be  drawn  upon 
to  accomplish  what  seem  to  be  as  impossible  results,  as  the  taking 
up  of  this  mountain  on  which  they  were  standing  and  the  casting 
of  it  into  the  sea — the  Dead  Sea,  which  lay  not  far  away  to  the  East. 
(The  frequency  of  this  proverbial  saying  among  the  Jews  is  evidence — 
if  any  were  needed — to  show  that  the  words  were  intended  figura- 
tively.) Believe  .  .  .  cometh  to  pass :  The  reality  of  that  depend- 
ence consists  in  its  ability  so  to  appropriate  the  divine  power  as  to  lay 
hold  of  the  results  aimed  at  as  already  potentially  present.  Such  de- 
pendence being  the  condition  of  success  in  all  the  activities  of  spiritual 
life,  it  is  consequently  necessary  in  all  the  petitions  of  prayer;  for  not 
only  is  prayer  a  spiritual  activity,  but  one  whose  effectiveness  is 
conditioned  by  that  fellowship  and  communion  with  God  that  ab- 
sorbs one's  helplessness  into  the  divine  power.  Stand — the  normal 
attitude  in  prayer  (i  Kings  8  :  22;  Neh.  9  :  4;  Matt.  6  :  5;  Lk.  18  :  11, 
13),  though,  under  pressure  of  great  solemnity  or  emotion,  the  peti- 
tioner kneeled  (i  Kings  8  :  54;  Ezra  9:5;  Dan.  6  :  10;  Matt.  26  :  39; 
Acts  20  136;  21  :  5).  Forgive  .  .  .  your  Father  may  forgive  you 
your  trespasses:  Fellowship  and  communion  could  not  be  between 
the  petitioner  and  God,  if  it  were  wilfully  hindered  between  the 
petitioner  and  his  brother  man;  so  that  the  forgiving  here  enjoined  is 
real  and  not  a  mere  formality.    Mark  alone  gives  the  application  of 

169 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

27.  And  they  come  again  to  Jerusalem:  and  as  he  was 
walking  in  the  temple,  there  come  to  him  the  chief 

28.  priests,  and  the  scribes,  and  the  elders;  and  they  said 
mito  him,  By  what  authority  doest  thou  these  things? 
or  who  gave  thee  this  authority  to  do  these  things? 

29.  And  Jesus  said  unto  them,  I  will  ask  of  you  one  ques- 

this  principle  of  the  fellowship  and  communion  of  faith  to  our  relations 
to  our  fellow  men.  The  fact  that  some  of  these  phrases  are  recorded  as 
occurring  in  previous  teachings  of  the  Master  (cf.  Matt.  17  :  20; 
Lk.  17  :  6)  is  nothing  against  their  actual  usage  here.  The  teaching 
itself  is  simply  an  enlargement  of  his  challenge  to  the  father  of  the 
Epileptic  Boy  (9  :  23),  and  is  itself  enlarged  upon  by  Paul  (i  Cor. 
13  :  2).    Verse  26  is  not  a  part  of  the  original  text  and  is  to  be  omitted. 

(5)  Jesus^  Authority  Challenged  by  the  Rulers,  11 :  26-33 

27,  28.  Elders  (Matthew  adds  "of  the  people"  21  :  23) — the  term 
for  the  general  Pharisaic  element  in  the  Sanhedrin.  The  specific 
Pharisaic  element  was  composed  of  the  Scribes;  the  Sadducean 
element,  of  the  Priests.  This  delegation,  therefore,  represented  the 
Sanhedrin  in  all  its  elements  (cf.  14  :  43,  53;  15  :  i;  Matt.  27  141; 
also  art.  Council,  Standard  Bible  Dictionary).  By  what  (lit.  what 
kind)  authority  .  .  .  these  things?  The  reference  is  doubtless 
primarily  to  Jesus'  casting  out  of  the  Temple  traders  (cf.  Jn.  2  :  18); 
although,  when  it  is  remembered  that  since  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles, 
in  the  previous  autumn,  Jesus  had  been  teaching  and  working  in 
Jerusalem  and  that  his  ministry  had  been  increasingly  angering  to  the 
religious  leaders  (cf.  Jn.  7  :  2,  25,  32,  45;  8  :  48,  59;  10  :  31-33), 
particularly  when  it  is  remembered  that  they  had  already  demanded 
of  him  whether  he  was  the  Christ  (Jn.  10  :  24),  this  challenging  of  his 
authority  is  likely  to  have  had  behind  it  not  simply  the  interference 
with  the  Temple  trafific,  but  the  claims  that  all  these  months  he  had 
been  making  by  word  and  deed  in  their  midst — in  fact  his  whole 
assertive  ministry.  (See  reference  by  Matthew,  21  -.it,,  and  Luke, 
20  :  I,  to  the  delegation  finding  him  engaged  in  teaching  in  the 
Temple.)  Officially,  the  question  was  justified,  since  they  were  the 
custodians  of  the  Temple;  but  in  reahty  it  was  a  cover  for  the  dilemma 
in  which  they  were  placed;  since  they  could  not  contest  the  act, 
without  courting  opposition  from  the  popular  enthusiasm  for  Jesus, 
as  well  as  criticism  from  the  better  conscience  of  the  people  against 
the  traffic  itself;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  they  could  not  approve  the 
act  without  condemning  their  own  previous  permission  of  the  trade, 

29-33-  I  will  ask  you  one  question:  (lit.  word):  This  was  not  to 

170 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

tion,  and  answer  me,  and  I  will  tell  you  by  what 

30.  authority  I  do  these  things.     The  baptism  of  John, 

31.  was  it  from  heaven,  or  from  men?  answer  me.  And 
they  reasoned  with  themselves,  saying.  If  we  shall 
say,  From  heaven;  he  will  say.  Why  then  did  ye  not 

T,2.  believe  him?  ^  But  should  we  say,  From  men — they 
feared  the  people :  ^  for  all  verily  held  John  to  be  a 

2,2^.  prophet.  And  they  answered  Jesus  and  say,  We 
know  not.  And  Jesus  saith  unto  them.  Neither  tell 
I  you  by  what  authority  I  do  these  things. 

12.  And  he  began  to  speak  unto  them  in  parables.  A 
man  planted  a  vineyard,  and  set  a  hedge  about  it, 

1  But  shall  we  say.  ^for  all  held  John  to  he  a  prophet  indeed. 

avoid  answering  their  question,  but  to  show  them,  on  their  own 
claimed  ground  of  being  the  guardians  of  the  people's  religion,  that 
they  were  not  competent  judges  of  what  constituted  religious  cre- 
dentials and,  therefore,  were  not  fit  to  challenge  his  authority  ^,Men- 
zies,  ad.  he).  The  baptism  of  John  (i.e.  the  Baptist's  ministry  in 
terms  of  its  characteristic  symbolic  rite)  .  .  .  from  heaven,  or 
from  men?  Had  they  answered  as  in  their  irreligious  hearts  they 
wanted  to  answer,  they  would  have  shown  that  their  judgment^  was 
against  John's  own  claim  of  a  prophetic  attestation  to  his  ministry 
(cf.  Jn.  I  :  27;  Matt.  11  :  7-14);  and  this  they  were  afraid  to  do,  for 
the  people  approved  of  John  as  a  prophet  (cf.  Matt.  14  =5;  Lk-  7  :  29). 
On  the  other  hand,  they  could  not  answer  the  question  in  accordance 
with  John's  standing  as  a  prophet,  since  then  they  realized  Jesus 
would  have  asked  them  Why  then  did  ye  not  believe  him  (cf.  Lk. 
7  :  30),  and  to  this  they  could  have  given  no  reply.  So  they  answered 
We  know  not,  and  by  this  reply  they  confessed  that  they  had  wholly 
failed  to  decide  the  question  of  that  great  teacher's  credentials  and 
were  in  no  way  fitted  to  pass  upon  those  of  this  Teacher  to  whom 
John  had  borne  witness  (Jn.  i  :  19-27)  and  who  was,  as  they  well 
knew,  greater  than  John. 

(6)  Parable  of  the  Wicked  Husbandmen,  12  : 1-12 

12  :  I,  2.  Began  to  speak  unto  them  (the  delegation  from  the 
Sanhedrin,  11  :  27;  Luke  says  "unto  the  people,"  20  :  9)  in  parables 
(Matthew  who  had  already  recorded  the  Parable  of  the  Two  Sons, 

171 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

and  digged  a  pit  for  the  winepress,  and  built  a  tower, 
and  let  it  out  to  husbandmen,  and  went  into  another 

2.  country.    And  at  the  season  he  sent  to  the  husband- 
men a  ^  servant,  that  he  might  receive  from  the  hus- 

3.  bandmen  of  the  fruits  of  the  vineyard.     And  they 

1  Grk.  bondservant. 

21:28-32,  introduces  this  one  with  "Hear  another  parable"): 
The  Master's  purpose  in  this  resumption  of  parabolic  teaching  is 
essentially  diflferent  from  that  which  he  had  when  he  first  employed  it 
in  his  Galilean  ministry.  Then,  it  was  to  further  the  sifting  process 
which  had  begun  among  his  followers — primarily,  to  offer  to  those 
who  were  receptive  to  his  message  truths  which  would  draw  them  to 
him  for  further  instruction.  (See  notes  on  4  :  2,  10.)  Now,  it  was  to 
accentuate  the  consequences  of  that  process,  which  had  practically 
come  to  its  end — primarily,  to  make  clear  to  those  who  were  hostile 
to  his  message  the  situation  into  which  they  had  brought  themselves. 
(See  notes  on  ver.  12.)  In  both  cases,  the  parables  were  used  to  dis- 
close truth.  In  the  former,  the  truth  invited  inquiry  for  its  further 
unfolding;  in  the  latter  it  made  inquiry  unnecessary  by  its  full  un- 
folding of  itself.  The  former  were  in  their  main  purpose  educative; 
the  latter,  in  their  main  purpose  judicial.  Vineyard :  The  description 
of  what  was  done  to  the  property  is  taken  so  definitely  from  the 
judgment  passage  of  Isa.  5  :  if.  as  to  make  obvious  from  the  start 
the  character  of  the  parable  and  those  against  whom  it  was  directed 
(cf.  ver.  12).  Hedge  (lit.  a  dividing  fence,  not  necessarily  of  thorns 
alone,  cf.  Isa.  17  :  11,  but  of  loose  stones,  cf.  Ps.  80  :  12;  and  some- 
times of  both,  cf.  Isa.  5:5)  about  it — to  protect  it  from  the  depreda- 
tions of  men  and  animals  (cf.  Ps.  80  :  i2f.).  Pit  for  the  winepress 
(lit.  an  under-vat) — the  receptacle  for  the  juice  usually  excavated  in  the 
rock  (cf.  Isa.  5  :  2)  under  the  tub  or  vat  where  the  grapes  are  trodden 
(cf.  Joel  3  :  13;  Hag.  2  :  16).  Tower — to  enable  the  watchmen  to 
overlook  the  vineyard  (cf.  2  Chron.  26  .  10),  possibly  also  as  a  lodging 
place  for  the  vine-dressers  and  for  the  owner  of  the  vineyard  at  the 
vintage  time  (see  art.  Vine,  Vineyard,  Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the  Bibky 
Single  Vol.  Ed.);  in  Isa.  5  :  2  spoken  of  as  built  "in  the  midst"  of  the 
garden;  usually  on  the  walls  themselves  (Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine, 
p.  421).  Let  it  out  to  husbandmen — farmed  it  out  to  those  who 
would  cultivate  it  on  shares.  Season — the  time  of  the  vintage 
(Matthew  says,  "when  the  season  of  the  fruits  drew  near").  Of  the 
fruits — i.e.  the  share  of  the  vintage  due  him. 

3-1 1.  Servant:   Mark  presents  most  fully  the  owner's  patient 
endeavor  to  secure  his  fruits.    He  sends  three  individual  servants  and 

172 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

took  him,  and  beat  him,  and  sent  him  away  empty. 

4.  And  again  he  sent  unto  them  another  ^  servant;  and 
him  they  wounded  in  the  head,  and  handled  shame- 

5.  fully.    And  he  sent  another;  and  him  they  killed:  and 

6.  many  others;  beating  some,  and  killing  some.    He  had 
yet  one,  a  beloved  son:  he  sent  him  last  unto  them, 

7.  saying,  They  will  reverence  my  son.    But  those  hus- 
bandmen said  among  themselves,  This  is  the  heir; 

8.  come,  let  us  kill  him,  and  the  inheritance  shall  be  ours. 
And  they  took  him,  and  killed  him,  and  cast  him  forth 

9.  out  of  the  vineyard.    What  therefore  will  the  lord  of 
the  vineyard  do?  he  will  come  and  destroy  the  husband- 

10.  men,  and  will  give  the  vineyard  unto  others.    Have 
ye  not  read  even  this  scripture: 

The  stone  which  the  builders  rejected. 
The  same  was  made  the  head  of  the  comer; 

1  Grk.  bondservant. 

these  he  follows  by  many  others,  and  these  by  the  sending  of  his 
beloved  son.  Matthew  speaks  only  of  two  groups  of  servants,  the 
second  indeed  larger  than  the  first,  and  finally  of  his  son  (21  :  34, 
36f.);  Luke,  merely  of  three  individual  servants  and  of  at  last  his 
beloved  son  (20  :  10-13).  Handled  shamefully  (lit.  insulted):  The 
insult  did  not  consist  in  mere  words,  but  in  the  treatment  to  which 
they  were  subjected  (cf.  Acts  5  :  41),  particularly  in  the  attack  upon 
the  head  (cf.  Matt.  27  :  2gf.).  They  will  reverence  my  son:  The 
expectation  on  the  owner's  part  was  as  reasonable,  as  the  conclusion 
drawn  by  the  husbandmen  that  by  killing  the  heir  they  w^ould  come 
into  possession  of  the  inheritance  was  irrational.  Out  of  the  vine- 
yard: An  indignity  added  to  the  murder.  Destroy  the  husband- 
men .  .  .  give  the  vineyard  unto  others:  Matthew,  who  at  this 
point  seems  to  be  primary,  represents  the  statement  as  drawn  from 
the  auditors  themselves  (21  :  41;  see  Jesus'  custom  in  other  parables, 
Lk.  7  :  40-43;  10  :  36).  It  came,  however,  more  likely  from  the 
people  (Lk.  20  : 9;  cf.  also  ver.  12,  below),  who  were  gathered  round 
him  as  he  taught  in  the  Temple  (Lk.  20  :  i),  than  from  the  delegation 
of  Sanhedrists.    According  to  Luke,  the  answer  seems  to  have  been 

173 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

11.  This  was  from  the  Lord, 

And  it  is  marvellous  in  our  eyes? 

12.  And  they  sought  to  lay  hold  on  him;  and  they  feared 
the  multitude;  for  they  perceived  that  he  spake  the 
parable  against  them:  and  they  left  him,  and  went 
away. 

followed  by  an  instinctive  "God  forbid"  from  those  who  would  ward 
oQ  the  realization  of  the  only  too  evident  application  of  the  Parable's 
lesson  (20  :  16).  In  this  case,  Jesus'  citation  of  Scripture  from  one  of 
the  commonly  accepted  Messianic  Psalms  would  be  to  confirm  the 
certainty  of  the  realization,  the  significance  being  all  the  greater  from 
the  fact  that  it  came  from  the  Praise  Psalm  whose  "Hosannas"  the 
multitude  had  shouted  as  Jesus  entered  the  city,  two  days  before 
(11  :gi.).  Matthew  adds  to  this  citation  a  further  statement  of 
Jesus  in  application  of  the  Scripture  to  the  punishment  to  come  upon 
Judaism  (21  :  43f.) 

12.  Sought  to  lay  hold  on  him  (Luke  adds  "in  that  very  hour," 
20  :  19)  for  they  perceived,  as  everyone  did,  that  he  spake  the  para- 
ble against  them:  The  Master's  teaching  in  the  Parable  was  per- 
fectly clear.  Israel  was  God's  vineyard  (Ps.  80  :  8f.,  i4f.;  Isa.  5  :  2;  Jer. 
2  :  21).  To  secure  the  fruits  of  her  religious  instruction  and  educa- 
tion, God  had  sent  to  her  prophets — many  of  them,  at  oft  repeated 
times  throughout  her  history  (Jer.  7  :  25;  25  ■.4) — but  she  had  re- 
jected their  messages  and  persecuted  them,  often  to  the  death  (Matt. 
2^  :  29-31;  Acts  7  :  52;  cf.  i  Kings  18  :  13;  19  :  2;  22  :  24-27;  2  Kings 
6  :  31;  2  Chron.  24  :  21).  And  now,  after  a  long  time  of  silence,  God 
had  sent  unto  them  his  only, — his  beloved  son — ^his  heir,  who,  through 
the  intimacy  of  his  relationship  to  him,  came  to  them  with  an  author- 
ity surpassing  that  of  all  the  prophets  or  of  any  angelic  messenger  he 
could  have  sent  (cf.  Heb.  i  :  1-4).  But  with  this  his  divinel)^  com- 
missioned Son  they  were  purposing  to  do  as  they  had  done  with  the 
prophets  (8  :  31;  10  :  33f.;  ver.  12),  with  the  reckless  idea  that  some- 
how, by  ridding  themselves  of  him,  they  would  perpetuate  forever 
their  religious  hold  upon  the  People  of  God  (Jn.  11  :  47f.).  For  such 
senseless  rebellion  against  God  there  could  be  but  one  punishment^ 
the  destruction  of  the  Rulers,  as  religious  keepers  of  God's  people,  and 
the  giving  of  its  care  to  those  whom  God  would  raise  up  in  their  place 
(cf.  Jn.  2  :  19;  cf.  also  Lk.  13  :34f.;  19  :  41-44;  Matt.  19  :  27f.). 
They  would  then  see  the  ancient  prophecy  of  the  Messiah  fulfilled  in 
the  exalting  to  glorious  power  in  the  kingdom  of  God  of  him  whom 
they  had  rejected  (Acts  5  :  30-32),  and  would  be  conscious  that  this 
enthroning  of  God's  Son  was  the  act  of  God  himself.    This  effort  to 

174 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

13.  And  they  send  unto  him  certain  of  the  Pharisees 
and  of  the  Herodians,  that  they  might  catch  him  in 

14.  talk.    And  when  they  were  come,  they  say  unto  him, 

lay  hold  of  Jesus  was  the  second  arousement  of  the  Rulers  against 
Jesus  during  Holy  Week.  The  former,  after  his  Cleansing  of  the 
Temple,  was,  however,  rather  of  a  consultation  among  themselves  as 
to  how  they  might  put  him  out  of  the  way  (cf.  11  :  18).  This  was  in 
the  direction  of  an  attempt  to  get  him  in  their  power.  But,  ap- 
parently, they  did  not  actually  make  the  attempt,  for  they  feared  the 
multitude  (Matthew  adds  "because  they  took  him  for  a  prophet," 
21  :  46).  So  they  left  him,  and  went  away  to  further  plot  against 
him,  while  the  Master  continued  his  parable  teaching — still  distinc- 
tive in  its  element  of  warning,  though  rather  directed  to  the  people 
than  to  the  Rulers  as  such  (Matt.  22  : 1-14 — The  Parable  of  the 
Wedding  Feast). 

(7)  The  Question  of  the  Pharisees  and  the  Herodians,  12  :  13-17 

13.  They  send  unto  him  certain  of  the  Pharisees  and  .  .  . 
Herodians:  Mark  is  not  clear  as  to  the  source  from  which  this  deputa- 
tion came.  It  might,  be  inferred  from  the  close  following  of  this 
passage  upon  the  preceding  one,  that  it  was  the  general  delegation  of 
Sanhedrists  who  had  challenged  his  authority  and  had  just  retired 
discomfited  by  his  Parable  of  the  Husbandmen.  Matthew,  however, 
states  definitely  that  it  came  from  the  Pharisees  themselves — evi- 
dently the  Pharisaic  party  in  the  Sanhedrin,  not  necessarily  from  the 
body  itself — and  that  the  Pharisees  who  were  sent  were  "their  disci- 
ples," rather  than  the  masters  themselves  {22  :  isf.).  If  so,  the 
matter  was  shrewdly  arranged.  The  presence  of  disciples  would  give 
an  appearance  of  sincerity  in  the  inquiry,  while  the  combination  of 
Pharisees  and  Herodians  would  add  to  this  appearance  by  presenting 
as  the  inquirers  those  who  held  opposite  sides  on  the  question  placed 
before  the  Master.  Both  Pharisees  and  Herodians  paid  tribute  to 
the  Roman  Government  as  an  unavoidable  necessity.  But  the 
Pharisees  resented  the  necessity  as  an  insult  to  their  claim  of  Jewish 
National  independence;  while  the  Herodians  were  favorable  to  it  as 
maintaining  the  Herodian  dynasty,  of  which  they  were  the  adherents 
(see  notes  on  3  :  6).  The  Master,  they  hoped,  would  thus  be  deceived 
by  the  seeming  ingenuousness  of  the  inquiry  and,  at  the  same  time, 
be  entrapped  into  an  answer  which  must  give  oflfence  to  the  followers 
of  the  one  side  or  the  other.  Catch  him  (lit.  as  a  wild  animal  in  the 
hunt).    Matthew  has  "ensnare  him,"  22  :  15. 

14-17.  True — i.e.  sincere,  truth  loving  (cf.  Jn.  7  :  18).  Carest  not 
for  anyone :  This  defined  the  way  in  which  they  considered  him  true — 

175 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

Teacher,  we  know  that  thou  art  true,  and  carest  not 
for  any  one;  for  thou  regardest  not  the  person  of  men, 
but  of  a  truth  teachest  the  way  of  God:  Is  it  lawful 

15.  to  give  tribute  unto  Caesar,  or  not?  Shall  we  give, 
or  shall  we  not  give?  But  he,  knowing  their  hypocrisy, 
said  unto  them,  Why  make  ye  trial  of  me?  bring  me  a 

16.  denarius,  that  I  may  see  it.  And  they  brought  it. 
And  he  saith  unto  them.  Whose  is  this  image  and 
superscription?     And  they  said  unto  him,  Caesar's. 

not  intellectually,  but  courageously  loyal  to  the  truth,  without  fear  of 
men.  Regardest  (Lk.,  "acceptest,"  20  :  21)  not  the  person  of  men 
(lit.  dost  not  look  at  the  face  of  men) :  An  expression  used  with  a  variety 
of  verbs.  Frequent  in  the  Old  Testament  (Septuagint),  primarily 
in  the  good  sense  of  a  king's  admitting  one  into  his  presence,  accepting 
one,  showing  one  favor  (Gen.  19  :  21;  i  Sam.  16  :  7;  42  :  8),  secondarily, 
in  the  bad  sense  of  looking  upon  the  face  rather  than  upon  the  heart, 
considering  only  the  outward  appearance  and  condition  (Lev.  19  :  15; 
Deut.  10:17;  Ps.  82:2;  Prov.  18:5).  Here  only  in  the  Gos- 
pels. Elsewhere  only  2  Cor.  5  :  12;  Gal.  2:6;  Jude  ver.  16;  all 
in  the  bad  sense.  From  it  are  derived  the  really  compound  words, 
" respect-of-persons "  (Rom.  2:11;  Eph.  6:9;  Col.  3  :  25;  Jas.  2  :  i), 
" respecter-of -persons "  (Acts  10:34),  "to  have-respect-of-persons" 
(Jas.  2:9).  With  these  questioners  it  described  the  spirit  of  im- 
partiality which  they  considered  as  behind  his  courageous  truthful- 
ness— a  truthfulness  which  showed  itself  in  his  teaching,  as  well  as  in 
his  life.  The  way  of  God — prescribed  for  men  by  God  (cf.  Acts 
18  :  25f.;  also  the  shortened  term  for  the  way  of  faith  which  the 
Christians  followed  out,  Acts  9  :  2;  19  :  9,  23;  24  :  14,  22).  However 
much  this  introduction  to  their  question  may  have  represented  their 
knowledge  of  and  convictions  about  Jesus,  its  purpose  was  through 
its  flattery  to  put  him  off  his  guard  and  thus  draw  from  him  an  in- 
cautious reply  to  their  significant  questions.  Is  it  lawful — in  the 
sense  of  being  permitted  by  the  Law  (cf.  2  :  24,  26;  6  :  18;  10  :  2). 
Tribute  (lit.  census)  to  Caesar — the  poll  tax  paid  by  the  Jews  di- 
rectly into  the  treasury  of  the  Emperor.  Shall  we  give  .  .  .  not  give? 
(only  by  Mark) :  In  all  likelihood,  the  presentation  of  the  question  was 
closed  with  this  categorical  inquiry  in  order  to  ward  off  discussion 
by  Jesus  and  draw  from  him  an  answer  in  which  he  would  commit 
himself  without  qualification.  Hypocrisy  (Matthew,  "wickedness," 
22:18;  Luke,   "craftiness,"   20:23):  They  pretended  to  ask  for 

176 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

17.  And  Jesus  said  unto  them,  Render  unto  Caesar  the 
things  that  are  Caesar's,  and  unto  God  the  things  that 
are  God's.    And  they  marvelled  greatly  at  him. 

18.  And  there  come  unto  him  Sadducecs,  who  say  that 
there  is  no  resurrection;  and  they  asked  him,  saying, 

enlightenment  and  instruction;  in  reality,  they  wished  to  compromise 
him  with  the  Government  or  the  people.  The  falsification  of  his 
answer  which  they  made  to  Pilate  shows  what  they  would  have  made 
out  of  it  had  it  been  against  tribute  giving  (Lk.  23  :  2).  Trial  of  me — 
in  the  sense  of  a  malicious  testing  of  him.  Denarius— the  Roman 
silver  coin,  about  20  cents  in  value,  in  which  the  tribute  had  to 
be  paid.  Matthew  speaks  of  it  as  ''the  tribute  money,"  22  :  19. 
Image  and  superscription — the  effigy  of  the  Emperor  surrounded  by 
the  inscription  containing  his  name  and  titles.  Render  (lit.  pay 
back)  imto  Caesar  .  .  .  God's:  Jesus  not  only  answers  their  direct 
question  regarding  tribute  to  the  Roman  Government,  but  also  their 
implied  question  regarding  loyalty  to  the  kingdom  of  God.  Their 
fundamental  mistake  was  in  making  these  two  things  mutually  ex- 
clusive. Jesus  shows  them  that  they  have  their  distinct  and  inde- 
pendent spheres  and  that  loyalty  to  God's  kindgom  does  not  neces- 
sarily involve  political  rebellion,  any  more  than  loyalty  to  Caesar's 
kingdom  carried  with  it  necessarily  religious  alienation  and  revolt. 
The  present  situation  was  one  of  subjection  to  the  Roman  power. 
Pay  the  tax,  therefore,  which  represents  the  rights  of  the  Roman 
control,  and  at  the  same  time  render  the  service  which  represents 
the  rights  of  the  Divine  claims  (cf.  Rom.  13  :  1-7;  i  Cor.  7  :  21-24; 
Eph.  6  :  5-8;  Col.  3  :  22-25;  i  Pet.  2  :  13-17).  The  question  of  refus- 
ing obedience  to  civil  authorities  when  their  requirements  were  in 
conflict  with  the  supreme  duty  of  the  soul  to  God  (cf.  Dan.  3  :  18; 
6  :  10;  Acts  4  :  19;  5  :  29)  was  another  matter  not  involved  in  the 
question  they  had  put  before  him,  (See,  however,  Hogg,  Christ's 
Message  of  the  Kingdom,  pp.  97-99.)  They  (the  questioners)  mar- 
velled greatly — at  the  way  in  which  he  had  escaped  the  trap  they 
had  set  for  him. 

{8)  The  Question  of  the  Sadducces,  12  :  18-27 
18.  Then  come  .  .  .  Sadducees — doubtless  delegated,  as  the 
Pharisees  and  Herodians  had  been,  by  the  Sadducean  party  in  the 
Sanhedrin  (see  notes  on  ver.  13),  and  not  long  after  the  return  of 
the  former  delegation  (Mt.  says,  ''On  that  day,"  22  :  23).  The  dis- 
comfiture of  the  Pharisees  allured  them  to  test  Jesus  on  the  great 
question  which  was  in  dispute  between  them  and  their  rivals  as  to 
whether  there  was  such  a  thing  as  a  resurrection  of  the  dead.    The 

177 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

19.  Teacher,  Moses  wrote  unto  us,  If  a  man's  brother 
die,  and  leave  a  wife  behind  him,  and  leave  no  child, 
that  his  brother  should  take  his  wife,  and  raise  up 

20.  seed  unto  his  brother.     There  were  seven  brethren: 

21.  and  the  first  took  a  wife,  and  dying  left  no  seed;  and 
the  second  took  her,  and  died,  leaving  no  seed  behind 

22.  him;  and  the  third  likewise:  and  the  seven  left  no 

23.  seed.  Last  of  all  the  woman  also  died.  In  the  resur- 
rection whose  wife  shall  she  be  of  them?  for  the  seven 

24.  had  her  to  wife.  Jesus  said  unto  them,  Is  it  not  for 
this  cause  that  ye  err,  that  ye  know  not  the  scriptures, 

Sadducees  represented  the  old  aristocracy  and  were  consequently 
conservative  in  their  theology,  as  well  as  in  their  politics,  while  their 
general  spirit  was  one  of  thorough  worldKness.  Naturally,  therefore, 
they  maintained  the  view  that  there  was  no  resurrection,  not  simply 
because  it  was  the  earlier  view,  but  because  the  denial  of  a  future  life 
accorded  with  their  worldly-mindedness  (cf.  Acts  23  :  8;  Schiirer,  II, 
2,  pp.  29-43). 

19-23.  The  purpose  in  their  question,  therefore,  was  not  to  in- 
volve Jdsus  in  political  difficulties,  but  in  partisan  debate.  The  ques- 
tion itself  was  based  upon  the  teaching  of  the  Law  in  Deut.  25  :  5-10, 
regarding  levirate  marriage;  though  the  later  legislation  of  the  Priestly 
Code  forbade  it  (cf.  Lev.  18  :  16;  20  :  21),  and  it  is  hardly  supposable 
that  it  was  in  practice  in  Jesus'  day  (Menzies,  ad.  loc).  Consequently, 
the  case  cited  was  not  an  actual  occurrence,  though  Matthew  repre- 
sents them  as  presenting  it  as  such  (22  :  25).  The  whole  question 
was  rather  purely  academic,  as  to  whether  the  provision  of  the  Law 
could  be  adjusted  to  a  belief  in  the  resurrection  on  Moses'  part. 

24-27.  Is  it  not  for  this  cause  {i.e.  the  cause  which  follows,  viz. 
their  ignorance  of  the  Scriptures  and  the  power  of  God)  that  ye  err? 
Their  mistake  in  attributing  an  inconsistency  between  the  teaching 
of  the  Law  and  the  idea  of  the  resurrection  was  due  to  their  failure  to 
understand  the  Scriptures,  whose  teachings,  after  all,  involved  the 
fact  of  a  future  life  and  the  power  of  God  to  adjust  the  resurrected 
body  to  the  conditions  of  that  life.  Neither  marry  nor  are  given  in 
marriage:  The  future  life  is  not  one  of  material  conditions,  as  the 
Pharisees  held  it  to  be  (see  Paul's  spiritual  advance  upon  his  older 
materialistic  ideas,  i  Cor.  15  :  35-53).  As  the  angels  in  heaven— 
in  whose  existence  also  the  Pharisees  believed  and  from  whose  spirit 

178 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

25.  nor  the  power  of  God?  For  when  they  shall  rise 
from  the  dead,  they  neither  marry,  nor  are  given  in 

26.  marriage;  but  are  as  angels  in  heaven.  But  as  touch- 
ing the  dead,  that  they  are  raised;  have  ye  not  read  in 
the  book  of  Moses,  in  the  place  concerning  the  Bush, 
how  God  spake  unto  him,  saying,  I  am  the  God 
of  Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of 

27.  Jacob?  He  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead,  but  of  the 
living:  ye  do  greatly  err. 

life  they  might  have  inferred  a  more  spiritualized  existence  for  those 
mortals  who  attain  to  the  life  of  that  heavenly  place.  While  Jesus 
thus  sides  with  the  Pharisees  as  to  the  question  in  dispute,  he  shows 
that  they,  as  well  as  the  Sadducees,  are  mistaken  in  their  views.  As 
touching  the  dead,  that  they  are  raised:  Jesus  had  shown  them  first 
their  ignorance  of  God's  power  over  the  conditions  and  adjustments 
of  the  future  life;  he  will  now  show  them  how  ignorant  they  were  of 
the  position  of  Scripture  regarding  the  fact  of  such  a  life.  The  book 
of  Moses — the  Pentateuch,  elsewhere  called  the  ''Law  of  Moses" 
(Lk.  24  :  44;  Jn.  i  :  45;  Acts  28  :  23),  or  simply  "Moses"  (Lk.  16  : 
29).  The  Prophets  are  similarly  termed  the  "Book  of  the  Prophets" 
(Acts  7  :  42).  In  the  place  concerning  the  Bush  (lit.  at  the  Bush, 
omitted  by  Matthew,  22  :3i) — at  that  section  of  the  Law  which 
relates  the  incident  of  the  Burning  Bush  (Ex.,  ch.  3),  indicating  ap- 
parently some  pre-Talmudic  division  of  these  Books  (cf.  Rom.  11:2 
mg.) .  He  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead  but  of  the  living :  The  eternally 
living  God  could  not  speak  of  himself  as  in  such  intimate  relations 
to  the  Patriarchs  who  had  long  since  died  when  these  words  were 
spoken,  if  they  themselves  were  not  then  living.  Mark  does  not  refer 
to  the  impression  made  upon  the  questioners  by  Jesus'  reply,  and 
only  hints  in  his  introduction  of  the  next  question  at  the  impression 
made  upon  the  multitude.  On  the  other  hand,  Matthew  states  dis- 
tinctly that  the  multitudes  were  "astonished  at  his  teaching"  (22  : 
33).  Luke,  who  through  combination  of  Mark  with  special  sources, 
has  given  a  record  of  the  incident  varying  greatly  from  Mark's, 
closes  with  the  statement  that  certain  of  the  Scribes,  who  were  Phari- 
sees and  had  doubtless  taken  keen  satisfaction  in  the  silencing  of  their 
rivals,  said  to  Jesus  "Master,  thou  hast  well  said";  for  his  triumph 
had  been  so  complete  that,  as  Luke  adds,  "they  durst  not  any  more 
ask  him  any  question"  (20  :  39f.).  The  question  of  the  Scribe,  there- 
fore, which  follows  in  Mark  and  Matthew  cannot  be  understood  as 

179 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

28.  And  one  of  the  scribes  came,  and  heard  them  ques- 
tioning together,  and  knowing  that  he  had  answered 
them  well,  asked  him,  What  commandment  is  the 

29.  first  of  all?    Jesus  answered,  The  first  is.  Hear,  O 

30.  Israel;  ^  The  L.   d  our  God,  the  Lord  is  one:  and 

1  The  Lord  is  our  God:  the  Lord  is  one. 

coming  from  the  Sanhedrin,  or  as  planned  by  the  Scribe  for  entrapping 
Jesus  in  his  reply.  It  was  clear  that  there  was  no  use  in  further  at- 
tempting this  sort  of  attack  upon  Jesus. 

(p)  The  Question  of  the  Scribe,  12  :  28-34 

28.  One  of  the  Scribes — who  had  been  present  during  the  en- 
counter with  the  Sadducees  and  had  recognized  that  Jesus  had  an- 
swered them  well,  put  to  him  a  question  which  doubtless  was  not 
captious,  but  prompted  by  a  genuine  desire  to  get  from  this  Teacher 
an  opinion  on  a  matter  which,  to  people  generally  and  particularly 
to  him  as  a  student  of  Scripture,  was  of  great  importance  (see  notes 
on  ver,  34,  below).  Matthew  who  is  not  primary  here — states  that 
the  Pharisees,  who  had  not  been  present  at  the  questioning,  hearing 
of  the  discomfiture  of  their  rivals,  took  counsel  together  and  that  the 
Scribe  came  from  them  to  Jesus  with  a  further  tempting  inquiry 
(22  :  34f.).  Luke,  having  recorded  a  similar  incident  in  the  early 
part  of  his  record  of  Jesus'  last  journey  to  Jerusalem  (10  :  25-37), 
omits  this  incident  here.  What  (Ut.  what  sort  of)  commandment 
is  the  first  of  all?  He  did  not  ask  for  a  definite  precept  which  was 
to  be  placed  before  all  the  others,  but  for  a  class  of  precepts,  or  a 
representative  precept,  which  would  indicate  the  commanding  line 
of  life's  obedience  to  God.  Doubtless,  the  distinction  between  legal 
and  moral  commands,  debated  among  the  Schools,  was  in  his  mind. 
Note  Jesus'  own  recognition  of  this  distinction  in  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  e.g.  Matt.  5  :  21-48,  and  later.  Matt.  15  :  1-20;  23  :  23. _ 

29-31.  The  first  is:  This  is  meant  in  the  general  sense  implied  in 
the  Scribe's  question — the  first,  as  the  dominating  direction  of  one's 
obedience.  Hear,  O  Israel — the  first  part  of  the  Jewish  Confession  of 
Faith,  or  Shetna'  (so  called  from  the  Hebrew  word  with  which  it  be- 
gins), which  was  recited  twice  a  day  by  every  pious  Jew  and  by  the 
strictest  of  them  carried  about  in  the  phylacteries  (lit.  preservatives, 
amulets)  worn  upon  the  forehead  and  the  left  arm  (cf.  Matt.  23  :  5), 
and  formed  part  of  every  Synagogue  service  of  worship  (cf.  Schiirer, 
II,  2,  pp.  84,  113).  It  consisted  of  the  three  passages,  Deut.  6  : 4-9; 
II  ;  13-21;  Num.  15  :  37-41.  This,  in  Jesus'  mind,  is  the  command- 
ment which  comprises  all  the  others,  informs  them  all,  gives  to  them 

180 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  ^  with  all  thy  heart, 
and  ^  with  all  thy  soul,  and  ^  with  all  thy  mind,  and 

31.  ^  with  all  thy  strength.  The  second  is  this,  Thou 
shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself.     There  is  none 

^2.  other  commandment  greater  than  these.  And  the 
scribe  said  unto  him.  Of  a  truth.  Teacher,  thou  hast 
well  said  that  he  is  one;  and  there  is  none  other  but 

^^.  he:  and  to  love  him  with  all  the  heart,  and  with  all  the 

1  Grk.  from  .  .  .  from  .  .  .  from  .  .  .  from. 

all  their  regulating  principle — the  love  of  God  by  the  whole  man — 
the  heart,  as  the  centre  and  source  generally  of  the  whole  inner  think- 
ing and  feeling  life,  the  soul,  as  the  source  specifically  of  the  emo- 
tional living,  the  mind,  of  the  intellectual  living,  the  strength,  of  the 
forces,  mental  and  physical,  which  call  all  this  living  forth  and  set  it  in 
action.  The  second  is  this:  Jesus  does  not  mean  that  this  is  subor- 
dinate to  the  other,  but  the  natural  corollary  to  it  and  its  necessary 
expression — consequently,  its  essential  equal  (Matthew  says,  "like 
unto  it,"  22  :  39).  It  is  cited  from  Lev.  19  :  18;  (cf.  Jas.  2  :  8;  Gal. 
5  :  14;  Rom.  13  :9).  Thy  neighbor — in  the  Law,  restricted  to  the 
fellow  Jew,  but,  as  shown  by  Jesus  in  the  Parable  of  the  Good  Samari- 
tan (Lk.  10  :  29-37)  and  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (Matt.  5  :  43- 
48),  used  here  in  its  widest  sense.  Jesus'  idea  is  that  a  man's  supreme 
love  to  God  has  not  shown  itself  to  be  real  until  it  has  expressed  itself, 
and  that  it  has  not  really  expressed  itself  until  it  has  taken  account 
of  the  relations  in  which  man  lives  with  his  fellow  man — in  other 
words,  that  its  expression  in  ceremony  and  worship,  however  ex- 
alted and  spiritual,  is  not  enough;  because  it  does  not  reach  its  su- 
premely regulative  control  of  living,  until  it  has  moved  out  into  the 
personal  relations  of  life.  Consequently,  there  is  none  other  com- 
mandment greater — of  more  real  importance  and  meaning  to  life — 
than  these.  Matthew  phrases  it,  "On  these  two  commandments 
the  whole  law  hangeth  and  the  prophets,"  22  140;  cf.  Matt.  7  :  12. 
32,  33.  Of  a  truth,  Teacher,  thou  hast  well  said  (lit.  Well  said, 
Teacher!  Of  a  truth  thou  hast  said):  The  significant  thing  in  the  Scribe's 
acknowledgment  of  Jesus'  reply — which  Mark  alone  gives — is  not 
so  much  the  enthusiasm  with  which  he  recognizes  the  masterliness 
of  his  interpretation  of  the  Law,  but  the  sympathy  with  which  he 
enters  into  the  principle  on  which  it  was  based,  as  shown  in  his  ad- 
mission that  to  love  God  and  to  show  that  love  in  our  relations  to 
our  fellow  men  was  much  more — something  more  excellent,  worth 

181 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

understanding,  and  with  all  the  strength,  and  to  love 
his  neighbor  as  himself,  is  much  more  than  all  whole 

34.  burnt-offerings  and  sacrifices.  And  when  Jesus  saw 
that  he  answered  discreetly,  he  said  unto  him,  Thou 
art  not  far  from  the  kingdom  of  God.  And  no  man 
after  that  durst  ask  him  any  question. 

35.  And  Jesus  answered  and  said,  as  he  taught  in  the 
temple,  How  say  the  scribes  that  the  Christ  is  the 

while — than  all  whole  burnt  offerings  and  sacrifices — a  statement 
perfectly  possible  to  one  who,  stimulated  by  such  an  insight  into  the 
Law  as  Jesus  had  shown,  had  been  able  to  realize  what  the  Prophets 
themselves  had  said  (cf.  i  Sam.  15  :  22;  Hosea  6:6;  Micah  6  :  6-8; 
Ps.  si). 

34.  Discreetly — intelHgently,  with  discernment  of  the  truth  in- 
volved in  what  Jesus  had  said.  Not  far  from  the  kmgdom  of  God: 
The  receptivity  of  the  Scribe  to  Jesus'  teaching  which  brought  him 
to  the  Master  for  this  further  instruction  showed  him  to  be  open  to 
those  influences  of  the  Spirit  by  which  men  were  drawn,  not  only 
into  Jesus'  following,  but  personally  into  spiritual  relationship  with 
him.  No  man  .  .  .  any  question — essentially  the  same  statement 
as  is  made  by  Luke  after  the  answer  to  the  Sadducees  (20  :  40),  but 
phrased  here  so  as  to  include  personal  as  well  as  party  questions, 
even  though  not  captious  in  their  spirit.  For  the  Master's  impressive 
statement  to  the  Scribe  that  he  was  not  far  from  the  kingdom  of  God 
would,  through  its  very  solemnity,  tend  to  close  the  further  public 
questioning  of  Jesus,  even  by  serious  and  earnest  souls,  as  his  crush- 
ing answers  to  the  party  delegations  had  taken  from  them  all  hope 
of  hampering  or  of  discrediting  him  through  this  mode  of  attack. 

(lo)  Jesus^  Question,  12  :  35-37 

35-37.  Answered,  as  he  taught:  Evidently,  after  the  public 
questioning  of  him  had  ceased,  Jesus  turned  again  to  his  teaching 
of  the  people  in  the  Temple,  in  which  he  had  been  interrupted  by  the 
Sanhedrists'  challenge  of  his  authority  (11  127),  and  the  later  partisan 
attempts  to  entrap  him  in  his  speech  (12:13,  18).  Iii  the  progress  of 
this  teaching,  he  propounded  a  question  about  the  Messiah's  rela- 
tions to  David.  Mark  represents  the  question  as  stated  generally, 
as  part  of  the  teaching.  Matthew  records  it  as  having  been  put 
directly  to  the  Pharisees,  who  apparently  had  come  back  into  the 
audience  after  the  discomfiture  of  their  rivals  (22  :  41).  Luke  gives 
it  as  asked  of  the  Scribes  who  had  approvingly  acknowledged  his 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

36.  son  of  David?    David  himself  said  in  the  Holy  Spirit, 

The  Lord  said  unto  my  Lord, 

Sit  thou  on  my  right  hand, 

Till  I  make  thine  enemies  ^  the  footstool  of  thy  feet. 

37.  David  himself  calleth  him  Lord;  and  whence  is  he 
his  son?    And  the  common  people  heard  him  gladly. 

I  Some  MSS.  read  underneath  thy  feet. 

conclusive  reply  to  the  Sadducean  delegation  (20  :4i).  If  Mark's 
view  of  the  incident  be  correct,  we  cannot  understand  the  question 
as  having  followed  immediately  upon  the  sincere  inquiry  of  the 
Scribe  regarding  the  great  commandment,  as  though  Jesus  would 
criticize  the  understanding  of  Scripture  represented  by  his  query. 
It  was  doubtless  put  as  a  counter  question  to  those  that  had  been  put 
to  him;  in  order  to  show  that  those  who  had  challenged  him  on  the 
academic  question  of  the  consistency  of  Scripture  with  the  idea  of  a 
future  life  were  themselves  open  to  challenge  in  their  teaching  of  the 
all  important  theme  of  the  Messiahship.  How  say  the  Scribes — i.e. 
How  do  they  reconcile  their  statement  that  the  Christ  is  the  son  of 
David  with  the  statement  by  David  himself  made  in  the  Holy  Spirit 
{i.e.  in  the  sphere  of  the  Holy  Spirit's  influence,  cf.  Lk.  2  :  27;  Rom. 
8:9;!  Cor.  12:3;  Rev.  i  :  10)  that  he  was  his  Lord?  If  the  in- 
spired word  of  the  Psalmist  be  accepted  as  to  the  Messiah's  Lord- 
ship over  David,  whence  (i.e.  from  what  reasoning,  by  what  argu- 
ment) is  he  simply  his  son?  The  significance  of  Jesus'  query  lies  in 
the  fact  that  the  teaching  of  the  Scribes — which  was  universally 
accepted  among  the  people  (cf.  10  :  47f.;  Mt.  12  :  23;  15  :  22;  21  : 9, 
15) — made  the  important  thing  about  the  Messiah  his  lineage  from 
David,  not  so  much  in  the  way  of  accrediting  his  ancestry,  as  in 
asserting  the  political  purpose  of  his  ministry  to  restore  the  royal 
kingdom  to  Israel  (cf.  11  :  10;  Acts  1:6).  In  emphasizing  this 
relationship  of  the  Messiah  to  David  and  gathering  around  it  all 
their  Messianic  hopes,  they  had  utterly  lost  sight  of  that  other  and 
immeasurably  more  significant  relationship  which  David  himself 
acknowledges  in  this  generally  accepted  Messianic  Psalm  (no  :  i) — 
that  the  Messiah  was  his  Lord,  supremely  greater  than  himself, 
seated  by  Jehovah  at  his  own  right  hand,  while  his  enemies  were 
being  subdued  under  his  feet.  It  was,  therefore,  not  so  much  to 
place  before  the  people  a  puzzle  for  the  Scribes,  nor  merely  to  dis- 
credit them  as  authoritative  interpreters  of  the  Scriptures,  but  to 
disclose  to  both  Scribes  and  people  the  teachings  of  Scripture  itself 
as  to  the  Messiah — the  teachings  which  gave  significance  to  the  claims 

183 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

38.  And  in  his  teaching  he  said,  Beware  of  the  scribes, 
who  desire  to  walk  in  long  robes,  and  to  have  saluta- 

39.  tions  in  the  marketplaces,  and  chief  seats  in  the  syna- 

40.  gogues,  and  chief  places  at  feasts:  they  that  devour 
widows'  houses,  ^  and  for  a  pretence  make  long  prayers; 
these  shall  receive  greater  condemnation. 

1  even  while  for  a  pretence  they  make. 

he  had  already  made  before  them  and  which  they  had  been  so  quick 
to  resent  as  blasphemous  (cf.  Jn.  5  :  18;  8  :  $2>i.;  10  :  29-33).  Jesus' 
reference  to  David  as  the  author  of  this  Psalm  was  in  accordance 
with  the  general  understanding  and  belief  of  his  day.  An  acquaint- 
ance with  the  facts  of  modern  critical  scholarship  is  not  necessarily 
to  be  attributed  to  Jesus,  any  more  than  a  familiarity  with  the  facts 
of  modern  science.  It  was  in  the  realm  of  the  moral  and  the  spiritual 
that  Jesus  was  conscious  of  a  relationship  to  God  that  isolated  him 
from  humanity  around  him,  however  his  unfathomable  sympathy 
and  love  identified  him  with  it.  The  common  people  (Ht.  the  great 
multitude,  present  at  the  Feast)  heard  him  gladly:  This  refers  to  his 
general  teaching  in  the  Temple  that  day,  and  not  merely  to  this  par- 
ticular question  which  he  had  propounded.  Its  dominant  character 
was  doubtless  controversial,  as  represented  by  the  Synoptics  and  the 
Fourth  Gospel;  but  there  must  have  been  much  in  it  that  appealed 
to  the  heart  of  the  people,  who  as  sheep  without  a  shepherd  were 
groping  for  the  way  of  life.  (See  Jn.  12  :  20-50,  which  records 
some  of  his  teaching  on  this  day — particularly  vs.  26,  32,  35f.,  46f.). 
Matthew  closes  his  record  of  this  question  with  the  statement  that  no 
one  was  able  to  answer  it,  and  follows  this  with  the  general  statement, 
which  Luke  places  after  the  discomfiture  of  the  Sadducees  (20  :  40) 
and  Mark  after  the  commendation  of  the  Scribe  (ver.  34),  that  no 
man  dared  ''from  that  day  forth  [to]  ask  him  any  questions"  (22  :  45). 
It  doubtless  confirmed  beyond  all  doubt  the  impression  already  made 
on  friends  and  foes  of  the  unassailable  superiority  of  Jesus  in  the 
interpretation  of  Scripture. 

{11)  The  Warning  Against  the  Scribes,  12  :  38-40 

38-40.  In  his  teaching — as  it  continued  after  the  propounding 
of  this  unanswered  and  unanswerable  question  (cf.  Lk.  20  :  45f.). 
Beware  of  the  Scribes:  This  warning  was  most  likely  suggested  by 
the  fact,  which  his  question  had  disclosed,  of  the  misleading  and  truth- 
obscuring  teaching  of  the  Scribes.  This  teaching  was  not  due  merely 
to  ignorance  of  the  Scriptures,  which  would  have  been  serious  enough, 

184 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

41.      And  he  sat  down  over  against  the  treasury,  and  be- 
held how  the  multitude  cast  money  into  the  trcas- 

but  to  the  personal  character  which  had  come  to  centre  everything 
upon  themseh'es  and  their  position  among  the  people,  until  religion 
had  lost  all  reality  in  their  lives  and  the  religious  idea  of  the  Messiah 
had  disappeared  wholly  from  their  thoughts.  Long  robes — worn  by 
persons  of  rank  and  distinction  (cf.  16  :  5;  Lk.  15  :  22;  Rev.  6:11) 
and  assumed  by  the  Scribes  out  of  pure  ostentation  (cf.  Matt.  23  :  5). 
Salutations  in  the  marketplaces— particularly  such  titles  as  Rabbi 
(teacher)  and  Abba  (father)  and  Moreh  (Master  [lit.  guide],  cf.  Matt. 
23  :  7-10,  as  ministering  to  their  self-glorifying  pride.  Chief  seats 
in  the  Synagogues — the  seats  which  were  reserved  for  the  rulers  of 
the  Synagogue  and  persons  of  distinction,  in  front  of  the  ark  contain- 
ing the  Law,  and  which  faced  the  congregation  (Edersheim,  Jesus, 

I,  p.  436).  Chief  places  at  feasts— probably  the  middle  divan,  or 
couch,  at  the  head  of  the  three  sided  table  around  which  the  guests 
reclined  (cf.  Matt.  23  :  6;  also  Lk.  14  :  7-11;  also  Edersheim,  Jesus, 

II,  p.  207).  Devour  widows'  houses— property,  the  wealth  or 
property  belonging  to  the  household,  which  possibly  as  followers 
of  these  Teachers  the  widows  bestowed  upon  them  for  their  sup- 
port (cf.Lk.  8  :  2f.),  and  which  they  greedily  wasted  (cf.  Lk.  15  : 
30),  in  direct  disobedience  of  the  specific  command  of  the  Law  that 
widows  should  not  be  afl3icted  (Ex.  22  :  22).  For  a  pretence— 
as  a  covering  under  which  they  sought  to  hide  their  iniquity, 
(Matthew  alone  preserves  this  denunciation  in  its  extended  form, 
23  •■  1-36;  though  Luke  has  reproduced  a  considerable  portion  of  it  in 
the  early  part  of  his  record  of  the  last  journey  to  Jerusalem,  doubt- 
less from  sources  special  to  himself,  11  :  42-52). 

(12)  The  Widow's  Mite,  12  :  41-44 

41.  Sat  down— not  so  much  to  rest  himself  from  his  teaching,  since 
as  a  teacher  he  had  been  seated  all  the  while  (cf.  Matt.  26  :  55;  5  :  if.; 
13  :  if.),  but  to  take  a  place  of  observation,  where  he  could  see  how 
the  multitude  cast  money  (lit.  bronze)  into  the  treasury.  The 
teaching  had  taken  place  probably  in  the  Court  of  the  Gentiles  (cf. 
Jn.  8  :  20  with  12  :  20).  After  it  was  over,  Jesus  had  passed  into 
the  inner  Court  of  the  Women,  under  the  Colonnade  around  whose 
walls  were  placed  the  trumpet  mouthed  chests  to  receive  the  offerings 
of  the  people.  This  Colonnade  was  called  the  treasury  (lit.  the 
treasure-hold,  cf.  Jn.  8  :  20).  Attracted  perhaps  by  the  people  moving 
towards  the  Colonnade  and  by  the  rattle  of  the  money  as  it  was 
dropped  into  the  chests,  Jesus  sits  down  to  observe  the  givers  in  what 
they  were  doing.  Many  .  .  .  rich  cast  in  much:  The  people  gen- 
erally gave  the  smaller  bronze-copper  coins  (such  as  the  "farthing," 

185 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

42.  ury:  and  many  that  were  rich  cast  in  much.  And 
there  came  ^  a  poor  widow,  and  she  cast  in  two  mites, 

43.  which  make  a  farthing.  And  he  called  unto  him  his 
disciples,  and  said  unto  them.  Verily  I  say  unto  you. 
This  poor  widow  cast  in  more  than  all  they  that  are 

44.  casting  into  the  treasury:  for  they  all  did  cast  in  of 
their  superfluity;  but  she  of  her  want  did  cast  in  all 
that  she  had,  even  all  her  living. 

13.  And  as  he  went  forth  out  of  the  temple,  one  of  his 
disciples  saith  unto  him.  Teacher,  behold,  what  man- 

1  Grk.  one. 

or  giiadrans,  equivalent  to  K  cent,  Matt.  5  :  26) ;  the  rich,  the  larger 
silver  coins  (such  as  the  "shilling"  or  denarius  [12  :  15],  equivalent 
to  about  20  cents,  6  :  37;  14  :  5). 

42-44.  A  poor  widow — significant,  in  view  of  the  widows  just  re- 
ferred to  by  the  Master  who  were  reduced  to  poverty  through  their 
support  of  the  Scribes  (ver.  40).  Two  mites — the  smallest  Greek 
coin  in  circulation,  equal  to  K  quadrans  ("farthing"),  or  V20  cent — 
which  (two)  make  a  farthing — the  smallest  Roman  coin.  Jesus' 
commendation  of  her  gift,  as  more  than  was  given  by  all  those  that 
were  casting  into  the  treasury,  was  not  in  contrast  to  its  size, 
since,  in  all  likelihood,  being,  in  its  total  value,  a  farthing,  itwas  as 
large  as  many  other  offerings,  but  in  contrast  to  its  spirit,  since,  in 
spite  of  her  want,  it  was  a  giving  of  all  that  she  had — all  her  living, 
i.e.  all  she  had  to  live  upon  until  more  was  earned  (Swete,^  ad.  loc, 
cf.  Lk.  8  :43;  15  :  12,  30).  From  the  way  in  which  the  gifts  were 
exposed  in  the  act  of  giving,  Jesus  might  easily  have  observed  the 
amount  of  her  gift;  from  her  dress  and  general  appearance,  he  might 
readily  have  surmised  her  extreme  poverty;  but  it  was  his^  divine 
insight  into  the  heart  that  disclosed  to  him  the  spirit  of  her  giving  and 
the  veritableness  of  the  sacrifice  the  gift  was  costing  her.  It  may  have 
been  that  while  Jesus  was  here  the  Greeks  made  inquiry  for  him 
(Jn.  12  :  20-22).  Being  Gentiles,  they  could  not  enter  the  Court  of 
the  Women,  which  would  explain  the  fact  that  Jesus'  reply  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  addressed  to  them  or  in  their  presence  (ver.  23). 

(13)  The  Apocalyptic  Discourse,  13  : 1-37 

I,  2.  He  went  forth  out  of  the  temple:  This  was  his  final  depart- 
ure from  the  Temple,  and  marks  the  close  of  his  public  teaching  (cf. 

186 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

2.  ner  of  stones  and  what  manner  of  buildings!  And 
Jesus  said  unto  him,  Seest  thou  these  great  buildings? 
there  shall  not  be  left  here  one  stone  upon  another, 
which  shall  not  be  thrown  down. 

3.  And  as  he  sat  on  the  mount  of  Olives  over  against 
the  temple,  Peter  and  ^  James  and  John  and  Andrew 

1  Jacob. 

Jn.  12  :36b,  VS.  44-50  having  been  transposed  from  their  proper 
place  between  36a  and  36b).  One  of  his  disciples:  We  are  not  told 
which  one;  but  the  very  fact  that  he  is  not  named  would  seem  to 
indicate  that  he  was  not  one  of  the  group  who  came  to  the  Master 
for  private  information  as  to  the  details  of  the  prophetic  statement 
he  had  made,  and  that  his  remark  was  more  or  less  casual.  What 
maimer  of  stones  .  .  .  buildings:  Matthew  implies  (24  :  i)  that  he 
was  on  his  way  to  Bethany  at  the  close  of  the  day  when  this  remark 
was  made  to  him.  This  would  be  quite  possible;  since,  as  the  road 
passed  up  the  farther  side  of  the  Kedron  Valley,  the  Temple  in  all 
its  glory  would  lie  before  their  gaze.  (See  description  from  this  place 
of  view  in  Tacitus,  Hist.,  v.  8).  The  substructure,  on  the  South 
side,  and  the  outside  enclosing  walls  had  been  built  by  Herod  out  of 
huge  blocks  of  stone  whose  dimensions,  according  to  Josephus  {Ant. 
XV  :  11.3,  Jeivish  War,  v  :  5.5),  almost  surpass  belief;  while  the  whole 
area  of  the  Temple  itself  was  surrounded  by  double  rows  of  mon- 
ohthic  columns,  quadruple  on  the  South  side.  The  Temple  building 
was  constructed  of  blocks  of  white  marble,  richly  ornamented  with 
gold  (cf.  Lk.  21  :  5).  Possibly  the  Master's  reference  to  the  coming 
desolation  of  the  city  in  the  closing  words  of  his  discourse  against 
the  Scribes  (Matt.  22,  :  2>^)  had  stirred  the  disciples  to  dwell  upon  the 
beauty  and  magnificence  of  this  its  great  building  and  to  call  the 
Master's  attention  to  what  seemed  to  them  impossible  of  such  a 
portentous  future.  Shall  not  be  left  .  .  .  one  stone  upon  another — 
a  prophetic  figure  of  utter  destruction  (cf.  2  Sam.  17  :  13;  Lam.  4:1; 
Mic.  I  :  6)  and  yet  fulfilled  in  the  case  of  the  Temple  to  an  extent 
appallingly  significant  when  what  is  left  of  it  is  compared  with  the 
extensive  remains  of  many  temples  of  antiquity  (cf.  Milman,  History 
of  the  Jeivs,  II,  p.  16). 

3,  4.  As  they  come  to  the  top  of  the  ascent  of  the  mount  of  Olives 
and  the  Master  seats  himself,  perhaps  to  rest,  while  still  in  full  view 
of  the  Temple,  Peter  and  James  and  John  and  Andrew — the  first 
four  of  the  Apostolic  list,  according  to  Mark  (3  :  i6f.) — came  to  him 
privately — apart  from  the  rest — and  asked  him  when  this  destruc- 

187 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

4.  asked  him  privately,  Tell  us,  when  shall  these  things 
be?  and  what  shall  he  the  sign  when  these  things  are 

tion  was  to  take  place  and  what  was  to  be  the  sign  that  should  usher 
in  its  accomplishment.  If  they  had  been  disturbed  by  his  general 
reference  to  the  coming  desolation  of  the  City  (Matt.  23  :  38),  his 
specific  prediction  of  the  utter  destruction  of  the  magnificent  Temple 
had  caused  them  deep  distress  and  they  come  to  him,  doubtless  de- 
puted by  the  rest,  to  learn  more  of  this  catastrophe  which  he  has  in 
view.  Matthew,  in  order  to  make  the  question  agree  with  the  an- 
swer, expands  it  so  as  to  include  an  inquiry  as  to  the  Master's  second 
coming  and  the  general  end  of  the  Age  (24  :  3).  Luke  follows  Mark 
in  confining  the  question  to  the  Master's  prediction  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Temple  (21:7).  It  is  evident  that  in  the  discourse  which 
follows  it  is  the  signs  that  are  first  referred  to  (vs.  5-143,)— and  that 
largely  by  way  of  warning  against  being  led  astray  by  signs  that  are 
false  (vs.  5-8)— and  also  counsel  as  to  the  obligations  to  be  recog- 
nized and  the  encouragements  to  be  had  in  the  coming  emergencies 
(vs.  1 1-13).  Such  reference  to  a  definite  sign  as  is  made  is  confined  to 
the  vague  statement  of  ver.  14a— a  statement  suggested  doubtless 
by  such  passages  in  the  Book  of  Daniel  as  9  :  27;  11  :  31;  12  :  11; 
while  the  reference  to  the  city's  overthrow  which  follows  (vs.  i4b-23) 
consists  of  warnings  uttered  in  view,  not  only  of  the  need  of  im- 
mediate action  when  the  catastrophe  should  appear,  but  of  the  se- 
verity of  the  event  itself  and  of  the  danger  which  it  would  bring  with 
it  of  being  led  astray  by  rumors  or  representations  of  the  returning 
Christ. 

It  is  further  evident  that  this  answer  to  the  disciples'  question  is 
expanded  into  an  announcement  of  the  Coming  of  the  Son  of  Man 
and  his  gathering  to  himself  of  his  elect,  with  the  portents  that  are 
to  precede  this  event  (vs.  24-27),  which  is  followed  by  a  warning  to 
take  heed  to  these  signs,  accompanied  by  a  reminder  that  all  these 
things  are  to  take  place  within  the  then  present  generation,  and  a 
consequent  exhortation  to  be  watchful  for  their  coming  (vs.  28-37). 

The  interpretation  of  this  discourse  is  confessedly  difficult,  even 
with  all  allowance  for  the  hyperbole  and  imagery  characteristic  of 
apocalyptic  utterance,  and  the  recognition  of  the  fact  that  its  pur- 
pose is  ethical  rather  than  predictive — to  warn  and  encourage  the 
followers  of  the  new  religion  in  the  time  of  their  perplexity  and  dis- 
tress, rather  than  to  give  them  beforehand  a  program  of  events.  It 
would  seem,  in  fact,  that  the  discourse  could  be  properly  understood 
only  when  it  is  realized  that  however  natural  it  was  for  the  IMaster, 
facing  as  he  did  the  tragic  closing  of  his  life's  work,  to  warn  and  en- 
courage his  disciples  regarding  the  future  to  an  extent  he  had  not 
done  before,  the  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  early  Church  to  elaborate 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

5.  all  about  to  be  accomplished?     And  Jesus  began  to 
say  unto  them,  Take  heed  that  no  man  lead  you 

6.  astray.     Many  shall   come  in  my  name,  saying,   I 

any  such  prophetic  utterances  would  be  equally  natural,  especially 
as  events  pointed  towards  the  coming  of  the  announced  catastrophe. 
It  is  probable,  therefore,  that  we  have  in  this  chapter  a  warning  and 
encouraging  discourse  of  Jesus  regarding  the  future,  as  that  future 
was  related  to  the  destruction  of  the  Jewish  national  religion,  but 
with  more  or  less  apocalyptic  elaborations  introduced  into  it  by  the 
early  Church,  which  would  account  for  its  extended  length — a  char- 
acteristic that  does  not  belong  to  Jesus'  discourses  in  Mark.  In 
this  form  it  may  have  circulated  as  an  individual  apocalypse  among 
the  Christian  communities  (see  ver.  14),  and  as  such  been  incorporated 
by  Mark  in  his  narrative,  this  Evangelist  having  it  in  a  less  elaborated 
form,  more  nearly  representing  Jesus'  own  utterances  than  either 
Matthew  or  Luke.  (For  other  instances  of  the  interpretation  of  ori- 
ginal utterances  in  the  light  of  the  thought  of  the  early  Church,  see 
notes  on  I  :  4  and  4  :  12.) 

5-13.  Take  heed  that  no  man  lead  you  astray:  The  warning  with 
which  the  discourse  opens  is  directed  against  the  influences  of  those 
who  would  falsely  represent  themselves  as  the  Returned  Messiah  and 
seek  to  lead  his  followers  away  from  the  truth.  This  warning  is  re- 
peated in  ver.  22  and  is  quite  intelligible  as  expressing  the  anxiety 
of  the  Church  under  the  pressure  of  the  emergencies  in  which  the 
Christian  communities  found  themselves  as  the  catastrophe  drew 
near  (cf.  Milman,  History  of  the  Jews,  II,  p.  371).  These  emergencies 
are  more  definitely  described  in  the  following  reference  to  wars  and 
rumors  of  wars,  which,  having  in  themselves  no  misleading  influences, 
were  not  to  be  feared,  but  to  be  accepted  in  a  patient  self-possession 
of  soul  as  the  things  which  must  needs  come  to  pass  before  the  con- 
summation is  reached  (cf.  2  Thess.  2  :  1-3).  Nation  shall  rise 
against  nation  .  .  .  earthquakes  .  .  .  famines:  These  expressions 
were  common  to  prophetic  and  apocalyptic  announcements  of  the 
judgments  of  God  (cf.  Isa.  8  :  21;  13  :  13;  14  :  30;  Jer.  23  :  19;  Ezek. 
5  :  12;  Rev.  6  :  8;  II  :  13;  18  :  8;  Enoch  i  :  6;  4  Esdras,  16  :  36-40), 
but  are  used  here  to  carry  out  the  assurance  of  the  preceding  state- 
ment and  to  make  clear  that  these  disturbances  are  not  the  ending, 
but  only  the  beginning  of  travail  (lit.  throes,  pangs)— the  technical 
phrase  in  Rabbinical  literature  and  in  popular  use,  for  the  calamities 
which  were  to  usher  in  the  Messianic  age  (cf.  Mic.  4  :  gf.;  Isa.  66  : 
7-9).  As  the  references  to  the  misleading  doctrinal  influences  are 
easily  understood  as  representing  the  anxiety  of  the  early  Church, 
so  these  references  to  outward  disturbances  are  intelligible  as  repre- 

189 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

7.  am  he;  and  shall  lead  many  astray.  And  when  ye 
shall  hear  of  wars  and  rumors  of  wars,  be  not  troubled: 
these  things  must  needs  come  to  pass;  but  the  end  is 

8.  not  yet.  For  nation  shall  rise  against  nation,  and 
kingdom  against  kingdom;  there  shall  be  earthquakes 
in  divers  places;  there  shall  be  famines:  these  things 
are  the  beginning  of  travail. 

senting  the  Church's  confidence  in  the  midst  of  the  poUtical  out- 
breaks, the  national  unrest,  the  earthquakes  and  famines  throughout 
the  Roman  Empire  preceding  the  Jewish  War  (cf.  Tacitus,  History, 
1:2).  They  have  too  strong  a  color  of  those  times  to  be  attributed 
to  the  Master's  own  discourse,  in  view  of  his  express  statement  that 
the  definite  announcement  of  the  day  and  hour  when  these  things 
should  come  to  pass  did  not  belong  to  what  he  had  to  say  (ver.  32). 
On  the  other  hand,  the  passage  which  follows,  however  (vs.  9-13), 
belongs  clearly  to  his  manner  and  habit  of  disclosing  to  his  disciples 
what  the  future  is  to  bring  to  them  and  doubtless  forms  part  of  his 
discourse.  Only  a  portion  of  this  passage  appears  in  Matthew's 
account  (but  cf.  Matt.  10  :  17-22),  and  this  very  much  amplified 
(24  :  9-14),  and  while  it  is  paralleled  by  Luke,  it  is  in  a  more  elabo- 
rated form  (21  :  12-19).  Take  heed  to  yourselves  (lit.  you,  your- 
selves): It  is  their  personal  relation  to  and  their  personal  behavior  in 
these  coming  trials  which  he  has  most  in  mind  and  regarding  which 
he  most  wishes  to  put  them  on  their  guard  and  give  them  encourage- 
ment and  cheer.  This  was  more  important  than  the  studying  of 
signs  and  portents,  and  was  the  essential  thing  in  the  service  they 
were  to  render  to  his  cause  (cf.  Lk.  17  : 1-3).  Deliver  you  to  councils 
and  in  (lit.  to)  synagogues  shall  ye  (properly,  ye  shall)  be  beaten 
and  before  governors  and  kings  shall  ye  stand:  Those  who  were 
to  "deliver"  them  are  stated  in  ver.  12.  The  "councils"  include, 
not  only  the  Sanhedrin  in  Jerusalem,  but  the  tribunals  in  the  various 
towns  and  villages,  consisting  of  the  Elders  of  the  local  Synagogues, 
in  which  the  sentences  were  executed  (cf.  Schiirer,  II  :  ii,  pp.  60-62). 
The  "governors  and  kings"  comprise,  obviously,  the  Roman  officials, 
not  only  within  but  outside  Palestine,  including  the  Emperor  himself. 
Such  a  forecast  as  this  was  perfectly  possible  on  the  Master's  part, 
in  view  of  what  he  had  foreseen  was  inevitable  in  his  own  case  with 
the  Jewish  rulers.  As  his  disciples  should  proclaim  and  live  his 
spiritual  religion,  they  would  be  subjected,  as  he  was,  to  persecution 
by  the  ceremonial  and  materialistic  Jews,  which  would  involve  more 
or  less  oppressive  action  on  the  part  of  the  civil  authorities  (cf.  8  : 

190 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

9.  But  take  ye  heed  to  yourselves:  for  they  shall  de- 
liver you  up  to  councils;  and  in  synagogues  shall  ye 
be  beaten;  and  before  governors  and  kings  shall  ye 
stand  for  my  sake,  for  a  testimony  unto  them.  And 
the  gospel  must  first  be  preached  unto  all  the  nations. 
II.  And  when  they  lead  you  to  judgment,  and  deliver  you 
up,  be  not  anxious  beforehand  what  ye  shall  speak: 
but  whatsoever  shall  be  given  you  in  that  hour,  that 
speak  ye;  for  it  is  not  ye  that  speak,  but  the  Holy 

31-35;  10  :  33-40).  For  a  testimony  unto  them:  Their  defence  be- 
fore the  civil  authorities  would  be  in  itself  a  proclamation  to  them  of 
the  cause  they  represented  (cf.  i  :  44;  6  :  11).  Luke's  idea  is  that 
their  defence  will  be  a  testimony  to  their  own  character  and  life 
(21  :  13).  For  the  realization  of  this  forecast  in  the  experiences  of 
the  early  church,  one  needs  but  to  recall  such  incidents  as  are  re- 
corded in  Acts  4  :  1-22;  5  :  17-40;  6  :8-is;  7  :  54-60;  8  :  1-3;  12  :  if.; 
13  :  7-12,  50;  14  : 5,  19;  16  :  19-23;  36-39;  18  :  12-17;  21  :  27-33; 
22  :  30;  24  :  1-25;  25  :  1-12;  26  :  1-32,  and  such  intimations  in  the 
Epistles  as  Jas.  2  :6;  2  Cor.  11  :  23-27;  2  Tim.  4  :  i6f.  The  Gos- 
pel must  first  be  preached  unto  all  nations — not  as  a  sign,  but  as  a 
duty  of  their  discipleship  (cf.  Matt.  10  :  23).  Matthew,  who  repro- 
duces this  verse  in  his  record  of  the  discourse,  24  :  14,  adds  in  a  later 
apocalyptic  spirit  "and  then  shall  the  end  come."  Be  not  anxious 
(ht.  distracted  by  anxiety)  beforehand  what  ye  shall  speak:  The 
reference  is  primarily  to  their  defence,  involved  in  which,  of  course, 
is  a  reference  to  the  resultant  testimony  to  the  Gospel.  Luke  says, 
"Settle  .  .  .  not  to  meditate  beforehand  how  to  answer"  (21  :  14). 
Not  ye  that  speak,  but  the  Holy  Spu-it  (Luke  refers  to  the  Master 
himself  as  the  one  who  will  direct  their  answer,  21  :  15):  This  is  not 
in  the  sense  of  a  verbal  inspiration,  but  of  a  divine  suggestion  of 
thought  and  speech  (cf.  Jn.  16  :  i3f.).  For  realization  of  this  promise, 
see  Acts  4  :  8;  13  : 9;  Rom.  15  :  19;  i  Cor.  2  : 4.  Brother  shall  de- 
liver up  brother  .  .  .  and  the  father  his  child ;  and  children  shall 
rise  up  against  parents:  The  bitterest  part  of  their  experiences  will 
be  the  estrangement  and  persecution  to  be  endured  at  the  hands  of 
their  own  kinsfolk — an  element  that  the  Master  must  have  only 
too  well  foreseen  from  what  he  himself  had  already  experienced  from 
his  family  (see  notes  on  3  :  21)  and  was  about  to  experience  from  the 
circle  of  his  chosen  discipleship  (cf.  14  :  10,  17-21,  41-45).  It  was  an 
experience  which  rested  in  and  resulted  from  the  profound  spiritual 

191 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

12.  Spirit.  And  brother  shall  deliver  up  brother  to  death, 
and  the  father  his  child;  and  children  shall  rise  up 
against  parents,  and  ^  cause  them  to  be  put  to  death. 

13.  And  ye  shall  be  hated  of  all  men  for  my  name's  sake: 
but  he  that  endureth  to  the  end,  the  same  shall  be 
saved. 

14.  But  when  ye  see  the  abomination  of  desolation 

1  put  them  to  death. 

principles  which  were  to  control  the  disciples'  living  (cf.  10  :  2gi.; 
Lk.  14  :  26;  Matt.  10  :  34-37,  and  see  notes  on  3  :  33-35),  and  would 
necessarily  affect  their  relationship  with  all  the  world,  to  the  extent 
of  their  being  hated  of  all  men  for  his  name's  sake.  This  was  not 
to  be  because  of  any  mere  partisanship  on  the  disciples'  part,  but 
because  of  the  necessary  fundamental  conflict  between  the  spiritual 
claims  on  character  and  life  which  they  asserted  and  the  natural  re- 
bellion against  these  claims  by  the  human  heart  (cf.  Jn.  7  :  7;  15  : 
18-24;  16  :  2f.;  17  :  14).  Matthew,  who  reproduces  this  verse  in 
his  record  of  the  discourse,  24  :  9,  13,  confines  the  enmity  to  the 
Gentiles.  For  the  realization  of  this  in  the  experience  of  the  early 
disciples,  see  Acts  4  :  17;  5  :  41;  9  :  14;  26  :  9.  He  that  endureth 
to  the  end  shall  be  saved — in  the  sense  of  8  :  35,  as  is  evident  from 
Luke's  paraphrase,  "In  your  patience  (lit.  enduring)  ye  shall  win  your 
souls  (ht.  lives)^'  21  :  19,  though  from  the  statement  with  which 
he  prefaces  it  (ver.  18),  it  would  seem  that  he  understood  these 
"lives"  in  the  sense  of  bodily  lives.  The  Master's  meaning,  how- 
ever, is  clearly  that  those  who  should  endure  to  the  bitter  end  of 
death,  might  lose  their  physical  lives,  but  would  preserve  the  higher 
spiritual  life,  which  was  their  essential  possession  (see  notes  on  8  135- 
37).  While  Matthew  does  not  have  this  passage  in  his  record  of 
this  discourse,  he  reproduces  vs.  9,  11-13  almost  literally  in  his  record 
of  the  Master's  instructions  to  the  Twelve  for  their  preaching  tour 
(10  :  17-22),  and  Luke,  though  he  parallels  the  passage  in  general, 
has  additional  traces  of  it  in  an  earlier  discourse  (12  :  7,  11  f.). 

14-23.  The  following  passage  is  in  general  a  return  to  the  apoca- 
lyptic point  of  view  and,  with  the  exception  of  certain  expressions,  is 
not  attributable  to  the  Master,  either  in  this  discourse  or  on  other 
occasions.  It  has  the  ring  of  an  impending  catastrophe  and  a  fore- 
boding of  national  disaster  such  as  would  be  natural  as  the  Jewish  war 
drew  towards  its  close.  The  abomination  of  desolation  (lit.  the 
abomination  that  is  characterized  by  desolation,  i.e.  that  brings  desolation 
with  it):  This  phrase,  as  distinctly  stated  by  Matthew  (24  :  15),  is 

192 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

standing  where  he  ought  not  (let  him  that  readeth 
understand),  then  let  them  that  are  in  Judaea  flee 

15.  unto  the  mountains:  and  let  him  that  is  on  the  house- 
top not  go  down,  nor  enter  in,  to  take  anything  out 

16.  of  his  house:  and  let  him  that  is  in  the  field  not  return 

17.  back  to  take  his  cloak.    But  woe  unto  them  that  are 
with  child  and  to  them  that  give  suck  in  those  days! 

taken  from  Dan.  ii  :  31;  12  :  11  (cf.  9  :  27),  where  the  reference  is 
doubtless  to  the  erection  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (168  B.C.)  of  an 
altar  to  Zeus  on  the  altar  of  burnt  offering  in  the  Temple  (cf .  i  Mac. 
I  :  54),  an  event  which  had  come  to  be  regarded  by  the  Jews  as  the 
type  and  symbol  of  the  most  absolute  and  utter  desecration  of  their 
religion  and  thus  of  the  most  awful  and  desolating  thing  that  could 
happen  to  them.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  in  the  year  38  a.d.  the 
threat  was  made  to  erect  the  statue  of  Caligula  in  the  Temple,  this 
phrase  is  used  here  possibly  as  indicating  the  belief  that  there  would 
be  another  supreme  defilement  of  the  holy  building  which  would 
mark  the  culmination  of  the  conflict  between  the  Romans  and  the 
Jews  (Luke,  who  writes  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  interprets  it  as 
referring  to  the  Roman  army,  which  lay  siege  to  the  city,  and  thus 
threatened  her  desolation,  21  :  20;  cf .  19  :  43f-)-  Let  him  that  readeth 
understand  (reproduced  by  Matthew,  24  :  15;  omitted  by  Luke, 
21  :  2of.) — a  parenthetic  phrase,  belonging  to  the  apocalyptic  docu- 
ment which  Mark  incorporated  into  his  narrative.  It  calls  attention 
to  the  significance  of  the  sign  just  given  and  is  distinctively  in  the 
spirit  of  apocalyptic  writing  (cf.  Rev.  13  :  18).  Let  them  that  are 
in  Judaea  flee  unto  the  mountains:  When  this  confidently  expected 
defilement  of  the  Temple  came  to  pass,  it  was  to  be  taken  as  a  signal 
for  an  instant  flight  from  the  City,  the  impelling  haste  of  which  is 
impressed  upon  them  by  the  characteristic  instructions  which  follow. 
They  who  might  be  at  rest  or  in  prayer  on  the  housetop  were  not  to  go 
down  nor  enter  into  the  house  to  take  anything  out  of  it,  but  to  flee 
at  once  over  the  housetops  themselves  to  the  place  of  refuge;  they  who 
were  at  work  in  the  field  were  not  to  go  back  even  to  where  they  had 
laid  aside  their  outer  garments,  to  get  them  for  a  covering  in  their 
flight,  but  to  escape  in  utmost  haste  without  thought  of  anything  but 
safety.  Luke  reproduces  these  directions  in  connection  with  his 
record  of  Jesus'  answer  to  the  query  of  the  Pharisees  as  to  when  the 
kingdom  of  God  was  to  come  (17:31).  He  tells  his  disciples  that, 
while  the  kingdom  of  God  was  not  a  thing  of  outward  observation, 
the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  would  be  an  event  clearly  discernible 

193 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

1 8.  And  pray  ye  that  it  be  not  in  the  winter.    For  those 

19.  days  shall  be  tribulation,  such  as  there  hath  not  been 
the  like  from  the  beginning  of  the  creation  which 

20.  God  created  until  now,  and  never  shall  be.  And  ex- 
cept the  Lord  had  shortened  the  days,  no  flesh  would 
have  been  saved;  but  for  the  elect's  sake,  whom  he 

21.  chose,  he  shortened  the  days.  And  then  if  any  man 
shall  say  unto  you,  Lo,  here  is  the  Christ;  or,  Lo,  there; 

22.  believe  ^  it  not:  for  there  shall  arise  false  Christs  and 
false  prophets,  and  shall  show  signs  and  wonders, 

23.  that  they  may  lead  astray,  if  possible,  the  elect.    But 

1  him. 

by  all,  and  from  the  destruction  accompanying  it  they  would  be  able 
to  save  themselves  only  by  indifference  to  worldly  interests.  It  is 
likely  that  these  directions  belonged  originally  to  this  discourse  of 
the  Master's  given  by  Luke,  from  which  they  were  incorporated  into 
this  apocalypse  used  by  Mark.  In  this  transposing  of  them,  however, 
their  primary  reference  to  the  ethical  attitude  of  the  disciples  towards 
worldly  interests  has  been  changed  to  a  reference  to  the  immediateness 
of  their  flight.  Luke  extends  this  by  calling  attention  to  the  divine 
justice  which  will  be  the  moving  power  behind  the  event  (21  :  22). 
Woe  unto  them  that  are  with  child:  The  terribleness  of  the  emer- 
gency in  which  they  are  to  be  placed  is  heightened  by  a  reference  to 
the  misery  of  the  women  who  would  find  it  impossible  to  flee  (cf .  Lk. 
23  :  28f.,  on  which  this  ''woe"  may  have  been  based).  Pray  ye  that 
it  be  not  in  the  winter  (Matthew  in  a  later  legalistic  spirit  adds 
"neither  on  a  Sabbath,"  24  :  20) — i.e.  in  January  and  February, 
when  the  conditions  of  flight  would  be  more  severe  through  the  cold 
and  the  rain.  Those  days  shall  be  tribulation  {i.e.  will  constitute  a 
tribulation)  such  as  there  hath  not  been  .  .  .  from  the  beginning 
of  creation  .  .  .  until  now,  and  never  shall  be  (shortened  in  form 
and  lessened  in  force  by  Luke,  21  :  23b) :  The  details  are  now  merged 
in  a  general  statement  of  the  severity  of  the  impending  disaster,  which 
is  given  in  exaggerated  terms,  common  in  apocalyptic  writing  (cf. 
Dan.  12:1;  Rev.  16  :  18).  Except  the  Lord  had  shortened  the 
days,  no  flesh  would  have  been  saved  (omitted  by  Luke) — the  form 
of  the  statement  being  put  in  the  past,  as  from  the  viewpoint  of  the 
Eternal  decrees,  and  the  statement  itself  adding  to  the  description  of 
the  unparalleled  agony  of  the  coming  catastrophe.    For  the  elect's 

194 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

take  ye  heed:  behold,  I  have  told  you  all  things  be- 
forehand. 
24.      But  in  those  days,  after  that  tribulation,  the  sun  shall 

sake  (omitted  by  Luke) — the  "remnant,"  which  figures  in  apoca- 
lyptic writings  as  those  who  are  to  be  graciously  preserved  from  the 
tribulation  (cf.  Rev.  17  .-14;  Joel  2:32;  Enoch  1:1).  Lo,  here  is 
the  Christ ;  or  Lo,  there ;  believe  it  not :  These  words  belong  probably 
to  the  Master's  parousia  discourse  in  Lk.  17  :  23-37,  from  which 
they  have  been  incorporated  into  this  apocalypse  used  by  Mark.  In 
Luke  the  caution  against  following  the  false  leadings  is  supplemented 
by  the  assurance  that  the  appearance  of  the  Son  of  Man  will  be  clear 
and  unmistakable  to  all.  Here  there  is  nothing  to  relieve  the  outlook. 
The  false  Christs  and  the  false  prophets  will  show  signs  and  won- 
ders, with  the  purpose  to  lead  astray,  if  possible,  the  elect.  We  have 
here,  as  in  ver.  6,  an  expression  of  the  anxiety  of  the  Early  Church 
against  the  possibihties  of  defection  under  the  stress  and  strain  of  the 
impending  disaster  (cf.  2  Thess.  2  :9-i2).  Matthew  has  extended 
this  warning  with  words  which  sound  as  though  they  may  have  come 
from  the  Master  on  some  occasion  similar  to  that  in  Lk.  17  ch.  To 
these  words  he  has  added  other  portions  of  Luke's  parousia  discourse 
(24  :  26-28).  Take  ye  heed  ...  I  have  told  you  all  things  before- 
hand— a  fitting  close  to  this  apocalyptic  passage,  in  its  assurance 
that  the  warnings  given  are  abundantly  sufl&cient  to  prevent  the 
elect  from  being  led  astray. 

24-27.  The  following  passage,  in  its  setting  of  celestial  portents 
(ver.  24f.)  is  apocalyptic,  representing  the  conviction  of  the  Early 
Church  as  to  the  manner  in  which  was  to  be  ushered  in  the  day  of  the 
Lord  which  was  to  mark  his  return  to  earth,  but  in  its  announcement 
of  the  fact  of  that  return  and  its  sequence  (ver.  26f.)  it  is  unmis- 
takably an  utterance  of  the  Master  himself  in  this  discourse,  paral- 
leled by  what  he  had  said  before  (cf.  8  .-38;  Matt.  13  :  41-43)  and 
by  what  he  was  to  say  later  (cf.  14  :  62;  Matt.  25  :3if.;  26  :  64). 
These  two  elements  of  our  passage  were  combined  in  the  apocalypse 
before  it  was  incorporated  by  Mark.  In  those  days — the  period  just 
referred  to  which  is  to  witness  the  City's  overthrow,  but  after  that 
tribulation  (Matthew  says  "immediately,"  24  :  29.  Luke  has  no 
note  of  time,  21  :  25).  The  sun  shall  be  darkened:  These  celestial 
disturbances  are  not  to  be  taken  literally,  but  as  the  imaginative 
language  of  apocalyptic  description,  derived  from  Jewish  prophecy 
(cf.  Joel  2  :3of.;  Isa.  13  :9f.;  24  :  21-23;  34  :  4;  Zeph.  i  :  i4f.;  cf. 
also  Rev.  6  :  12-14;  2  Pet.  3  :  10-12).  The  Powers  that  are  in 
the  heavens — the  heavenly  bodies  generally,  referred  to  in  Isa.  34  :  4 
as  "the  host  of  heaven"  (cf.  also  Deut.  4  :  19;  Neh.  9  :  6;  Ps.  7,2>  '•  6; 

19s 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


25.  be  darkened,  and  the  moon  shall  not  give  her  light,  and 
the  stars  shall  be  falling  from  heaven,  and  the  powers 

26.  that  are  in  the  heavens  shall  be  shaken.  And  then 
shall  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in  clouds  with 

27.  great  power  and  glory.  And  then  shall  he  send  forth 
the  angels,  and  shall  gather  together  his  elect  from 
the  four  winds,  from  the  uttermost  part  of  the  earth 
to  the  uttermost  part  of  heaven. 

28.  Now  from  the  fig  tree  learn  her  parable:  when  her 

Isa.  40  :  26;  45  :  12;  Jer.  33  :  22;  Dan.  8  :  10).  Then  shall  they 
see  the  Son  of  Man  coming  in  clouds  with  great  power  and 
glory:  This  description  seems  to  be  intended  in  a  sense  more  literal 
than  that  of  the  disturbance  of  the  heavenly  bodies  (cf.  Acts  i  :  n;  i 
Thess.  4  :  15-17).  It  is  adopted  by  the  Master  obviously  from  the 
passage  in  Daniel  which  describes  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of 
the  "Son  of  man"  (7  :  i3f.)  and  is  used  here  to  describe  in  Old  Testa- 
ment apocalyptic  terms  familiar  to  the  disciples  the  final  consumma- 
tion of  his  kingdom  (cf.  Rev.  i  :  7;  14  :  14).  This  passage  doubtless 
lies  behind  his  earlier  and  later  references  to  this  event  (cf.  8  :  38; 
14  :  62;  Matt.  25  :  3if.;  26  :  64).  In  view  of  the  explicit  statement  of 
ver.  32'  no  inference  can  be  drawn  as  to  how  closely  Jesus  expected 
his  return  to  be  connected  with  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  though 
it  would  seem  from  ver.  30  that  he  looked  for  it  within  his  generation. 
Then  shall  he  send  forth  his  angels— as  his  ministering  servants 
(cf  Matt.  13  :  4if.;  Heb.  i  :  i3f.),  based,  doubtless,  on  Dan.  7  :  10 
(cf.  I  :  13;  Jn.  I  :  51).  His  elect— recast  in  later  apocalyptic  phrase 
from  the  simpler  expression  "the  righteous,"  used  by  the  Master  in 
his  explanation  of  the  parable  of  the  Tares  (Matt.  13  :  43)-  From 
the  four  winds  ...  the  uttermost  part  (lit.  point)  of  earth  ... 
heaven— an  enlargement,  probably  by  the  Master  himself,  of  his 
statement  in  connection  with  the  healing  of  the  Centurion's  servant 
(Matt.  8:11)  and  based,  perhaps,  on  Deut.  30  :  4  and  the  LXX  of 
Zech.  2  : 6.  Both  Matthew  and  Luke  have  amplified  this  passage 
(vs.  24-27)  with  later  apocalyptic  phrases,  which  may  or  may  not 
have  been  in  the  apocalypse  used  by  Mark.  Luke,  on  the  other  hand, 
has  no  reference  to  the  gathering  together  of  the  elect  (cf.  Matt. 
24  :  29-31 ;  Lk.  21  :  25-28). 

28-37.  The  remainder  of  the  chapter  follows  as  an  exhortation  to 
the  disciples  to  be  ready  for  these  events,  and  shows  itself  clearly  to 
be  from  the  Master  himself.    It  formed  the  closing  porUon  of  the 

196 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

branch  is  now  become  tender,  and  putteth  forth  its 

29.  leaves,  ye  know  that  the  summer  is  nigh;  even  so  ye 
also,  when  ye  see  these  things  coming  to  pass,  know 

30.  ye  that  ^  he  is  nigh,  even  at  the  doors.    Verily  I  say 
unto  you,  This  generation  shall  not  pass  away,  until 

31.  all  these  things  be  accomplished.    Heaven  and  earth 
shall  pass  away:  but  my  words  shall  not  pass  away. 

It/. 

apocalyptic  writing  which  Mark  has  incorporated  here  into  his 
narrative.  From  the  fig  tree  learn  her  parable  {i.e.  the  analogy  it 
offers  for  illustration) :  Unlike  the  one  exceptional  fig  tree  on  the  way 
from  Bethany,  which  he  made  an  object  lesson  to  the  disciples  of  the 
rehgious  frui'tlessness  of  the  Jewish  nation,  it  is  here  the  general  class 
of  fig  trees  which  he  uses  in  the  normal  functions  of  their  life  to  make 
clear  the  development  which  is  to  lead  up  to  this  great  catastrophe. 
Tender:  The  reference  here  is  to  the  softening  of  the  branch  through 
the  flowing  of  the  sap,  the  result  of  which  is  the  bursting  of  the  buds 
and  the  unfolding  of  the  leaves.  The  Master  was  speaking  at  the 
Passover  time,  when  the  new  leaves  would  be  appearing.  But  when 
this  stage  of  the  process  is  reached,  everyone  knows  that  the  summer 
is  nigh.  When  ye  see  these  things  (Matthew  enlarges  by  saying  "all 
these  things,"  24  :  ^T))  coming  to  pass,  know  ye  that  he  (better,  //. 
Note  Luke's  substitution,  "the  kingdom  of  God,"  21  :3i)  is  nigh, 
even  at  the  doors:  The  things  the  Master  had  in  mind  are  obviously 
not  either  the  wars  and  earthquakes  and  famines,  which  the  apoca- 
lypse sets  down  as  the  beginning  of  the  woes  (ver.  ^i.),  or  the  ap- 
pearance of  the  abomination  of  desolation,  which  is  the  sign  of  their 
culmination  (ver.  14),  or  even  the  celestial  disturbances  which  are  to 
usher  in  the  final  and  (ver.  24f.) — the  analogy  of  a  process  of  life 
which  he  has  chosen  in  the  fig  tree  forbids,  in  fact,  a  reference  to 
anything  but  the  development  of  the  age  in  which  they  were  living. 
The  Master's  meaning,  therefore — quite  in  keeping  with  the  spirit  of 
vs.  9-13 — is  that  the  disciples  do  not  need  specific  signs  to  tell  them 
when  this  catastrophe  is  to  take  place  (ver.  4) — that  an  ordinary 
appreciation  of  what  is  going  on  in  the  world  around  them  will  dis- 
close to  them  the  coming  of  this  event.  In  other  words,  when  they 
see  the  spirit  of  hatred  and  enmity — of  which  he  had  forewarned 
them  in  vs.  9-13 — coming  to  its  unbridled  expression,  they  might 
understand  that  the  hour  of  judgment  against  their  persecutors  was 
drawing  near. 

By  its  amplification  of  the  Master's  discourse,  this  apocalypse  has 

197 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

32.  But  of  that  day  or  that  hour  knoweth  no  one,  not 
even  the  angels  in  heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but  the 
Father. 
^^.  Take  ye  heed,  watch  ^  and  pray:  for  ye  known  not 
34.  when  the  time  is.  It  is  as  when  a  man,  sojourning  in 
another  country,  having  left  his  house,  and  given  au- 
thority to  his  ^  servants,  to  each  one  his  work,  com- 

1  Some  MSS.  omit  and  pray.  2  q^-^  bondservants. 

lost  the  original  reference  of  "these  things"  and  has  made  them  refer 
to  the  specific  signs  which  it  had  introduced  into  the  forecast  and 
which  had  been  suggested  by  the  pressure  of  the  times  in  which  it 
was  composed.  This  generation  shall  not  pass  away  until  all  these 
things  shall  be  accomplished:  There  can  be  no  question  that  the 
Master's  belief  was  that  not  only  the  bitter  hatred  of  his  spiritual 
message  to  the  Jewish  people  would  reach  its  culmination  in  the  judi- 
cial overthrow  of  the  Holy  City  within  the  generation  in  which  they 
were  living,  but  that  within  this  same  period  would  occur  his  own 
return  in  the  triumph  of  his  kingdom  in  the  world  (see  notes  on  8  :  34 
and  9:1).  This  statement  cannot  rationally  be  understood  in  any 
other  way  (cf.  8  :  12,  38;  Matt.  11  :  i6f.;  12  :  4if.;  Lk.  17  :  25;  par- 
ticularly Matt.  23  :s6).  That  this  triumph  would  occur,  he  knew 
with  the  divine  certainty  of  his  knowledge  of  the  conquest  his  message 
and  mission  would  have  over  the  human  race.  Heaven  and  eartib 
shall  pass  away,  but  my  words  shall  not  pass  away  (cf.  Isa.  51  :  6). 
But,  in  answer  to  the  first  part  of  the  disciples'  question  (ver.  4),  of 
that  day  or  that  hour,  when  this  judgment  should  take  place  and  this 
triumph  follow,  knoweth  no  man,  not  even  the  angels  in  heaven, 
neither  the  Son  (as  he  is  on  earth,  cf.  Matt.  11  :  27;  Jn.  5  :  igf.; 
6  :  40;  17  :  i;  I  Jn.  2  :  22f.);  because  it  was  dependent,  not  only  upon 
the  untimed  working  out  of  the  enmity  of  the  human  heart  against 
the  love  of  God,  but  upon  the  even  less  timed  outworking  of  the 
human  will  in  its  acceptance  of  that  love.  In  his  human  conditions, 
Jesus  was  limited  in  his  knowledge  of  this  time  element  in  the  rela- 
tions of  the  heart  and  will  of  man  to  the  love  of  God.  That  was 
understood  and  known  by  no  one  but  the  Father.  (See  Hogg, 
Christ's  Message  of  the  Kingdom  p.  42f.)  Consequently,  he  has 
but  one  thing  to  urge  upon  the  disciples — the  need  of  giving  heed 
to  their  personal  lives,  as  those  lives  expressed  themselves  in  their 
work  (ver.  t,^,),  and  of  being  watchful  of  the  signs  of  the  times 
(Mark's  added  phrase,  "and  pray,"  is  not  part  of  the  text);  for  there 
was  no  way  in  which,  ignorant  as  they  were  of  the  day  and  the  hour 

198 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


35.  manded  also  the  porter  to  watch.  Watch  therefore: 
for  ye  know  not  when  the  lord  of  the  house  cometh, 
whether  at  even,  or  at  midnight,  or  at  cockcrowing, 

36.  or  in  the  morning;  lest  coming  suddenly  he  find  you 

37.  sleeping.  And  what  I  say  unto  you  I  say  unto  all, 
Watch. 

III.  The  Passion  and  Resurrection,  14  : 1-16  : 8 
14.      Now  after  two  days  was  the  feast  of  the  passover 
and  the  unleavened  bread:  and  the  chief  priests  and 

of  this  event,  they  could  calculate  ahead  when  it  was  to  occur.  He 
was  the  householder  who,  for  a  time,  would  be  sojourning  in  an- 
other (heavenly)  country,  with  his  household  left  in  charge  of  his 
servants.  Each  one  of  the  servants  had  his  work  given  to  him  to  do, 
and  their  chief  responsibility  would  be  the  accomphshing  of  their 
appointed  tasks.  But  these  tasks  involved  the  duty  of  a  porter— 
which  is  significant  here,  because  of  the  similar  duty  belonging  to  the 
Temple  guards  (cf.  Edersheim,  Temple,  p.  120)— to  open  the  door 
to  the  lord  of  the  house  when  he  cometh,  whether  at  even,  or  at 
midnight,  or  at  cockcrowing,  or  in  the  mornmg  (the  popular  expres- 
sions for  the  four  Roman  night  watches  from  six  to  six).  Together, 
therefore,  with  the  natural  command  to  take  heed  to  the  work  of  their 
lives,  there  was  the  other  needful  command  to  watch,  lest  coming 
suddenly  (not  capriciously  on  the  part  of  the  householder,  but  un- 
expectedly to  the  servants)  the  lord  of  the  house  find  them  sleepmg— 
neglectful  of  their  duty  with  reference  to  his  promised  return— in 
other  words,  careless  of  the  relation  of  their  work  to  the  triumph 
of  the  kingdom  (cf.  Matt.  24  :  45-51;  Lk.  12  :  42-46,  and  the  follow- 
ing parables  in  Matthew,  ch.  25).  Naturally,  this  command  to  these 
four  disciples  was  one  to  be  made,  not  only  to  the  rest  of  the  Twelve, 
but  to  all  who  were  his  disciples.  This  passage  (vs.  28-37)  is  largely 
extended  by  Matthew  (24  :  32-51)  with  utterances  of  the  Master 
found  in  two  discourses  given  in  Luke's  record  of  the  Journey  to 
Jerusalem  (12  :  39f.;  42-46;  17  :  26f.,  34f-),  and  is  then  supplemented 
with  the  Parable  of  the  Ten  Virgins  (25  :  1-13),  the  Parable  of  the 
Talents  (25  :  14-30),  and  the  depiction  of  the  Judgment  Day  (25  :  31- 
46).  On  the  other  hand,  Luke  omits  from  the  first  part  of  the  passage 
the  significant  statement  about  the  knowledge  of  the  day  and  hour 
of  the  coming  events  (ver.  32),  and  greatly  modifies  the  contents  of 
thesecondpart  (21  :  34-36).  ,  ,„,,„, 
This  closes  the  record  of  Tuesday  of  Holy  Week. 

199 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

the  scribes  sought  how  they  might  take  him  with 

2.  subtlety,  and  kill  him:  for  they  said,  Not  during  the 
feast,  lest  haply  there  shall  be  a  tumult  of  the  people. 

3.  And  while  he  was  in  Bethany  in  the  house  of  Simon 

(i)  The  Conspiracy  of  the  Riders,  the  Supper  at  Bethany,  and  the 
Treachery  oj  Jtidas,  14  :  i-ii 

14  : 1,  2.  After  two  days  was  the  feast  of  the  passover  and  the 
unleavened  bread:  The  entire  festival  of  seven  days,  beginning  with 
the  Passover  Meal  and  continuing  through  the  week  of  unfermented 
bread,  is  here  referred  to  by  this  double  title  (given  only  by  Mark; 
cf.  I  Esdras  i  :  17).  The  phrase,  "after  two  days,"  would  place  the 
opening  meal,  according  to  Jewish  reckoning,  on  the  next  day.  As 
this  meal  took  place  on  the  14th  Nisan  (the  first  month  in  the  Jewish 
year),  the  day  of  our  passage  would  be  the  13th,  or  Wednesday  of 
Holy  Week.  The  festival  was  intended  to  commemorate  the  hurried 
departure  of  the  Hebrews  from  Egypt,  and  was  distinctively  the 
people's  national  feast  (Ex.  12  :  1-28).  The  fact  that  this  is  the 
first  mention  of  the  feast  in  the  Synoptic  record  of  this  week  brings 
out  into  clear  light  Jesus'  motive  in  leaving  Gahlee  and  coming  into 
Judaea  and  to  Jerusalem.  It  was  not  to  attend  the  feasts  at  which 
he  had  already  been  present  (Jn.  7  :  2;  10  :  22)  or  this  one  now  at 
hand,  but  to  face  the  inevitable  ending  of  his  mission,  of  which  he 
had  been  convinced  from  the  beginning  (see  notes  on  2  :  12;  cf.  also 
Jn.  2  :  19)  and  which  now,  since  the  alienation  of  the  people  in 
Gahlee  from  his  spiritual  message,  and  the  increasing  hostility  of  the 
Jerusalem  leaders  to  his  spiritual  claims,  had  become  a  certainty  of 
impending  nearness.  Sought  how  they  might  take  him  with  sub- 
tlety (ht.  with  craft)  and  kill  him :  Matthew  informs  us  that  they  met 
in  the  house  of  Caiaphas  (26  :  3),  who  had  already  adv^ocated  the 
policy  of  sacrificing  Jesus  in  the  interest  of  their  relations  to  the 
Roman  power  (Jn.  11  :  49f.).  This  consultation  of  the  Sanhedrin 
was  caused  by  the  failure  of  its  representatives  to  successfully  chal- 
lenge Jesus'  authority  (11  :  28-33),  to  discredit  him  with  the  people 
or  the  government  (12  :  13-17),  and  to  entrap  him  in  his  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Law  (i 2  :  18-27).  It  did  not  represent  the  first  appearance 
of  their  murderous  plan  against  him;  for  they  had  long  since  deter- 
mined upon  his  death  (Jn.  5  :  18),  but  a  conviction  that  their  plan 
must  be  carried  out, — the  only  question  being  as  to  how  it  might  be 
accomplished  without  creating  a  riot  among  the  people,  with  whom 
they  knew  he  was  intensely  popular.  In  view  of  this,  they  agreed 
that  nothing  must  be  attempted  during  the  feast,  when  pubUcity 
could  not  be  avoided. 

3.  While  he  was  in  Bethany  ...  as  he  sat  at  meat:  The  Fourth 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


the  leper,  as  he  sat  at  meat,  there  came  a  woman  hav- 
ing an  alabaster  cruse  of  ointment  of  ^  pure  nard 
very  costly;  atid  she  brake  the  cruse,  and  poured  it 


liquid. 


Evangelist  definitely  places  this  supper  on  the  evening  previous  to  the 
Triumphal  Entry  (12  :  if.,  12),  and  while  the  Synoptists  unite  in 
placing  it  here,  no  one  of  them  does  so  with  any  distinct  statement  of 
time  that  necessarily  connects  it  with  the  preceding  context.  It 
is  likely  that  Mark  either  found  it  so  generally  connected  with  the 
story  of  Judas'  treachery  in  the  Apostolic  preaching  as  to  be  left 
without  hint  of  the  other  connection,  or  else,  out  of  a  tendency  to 
group  his  material  (see  notes  on  3  :  6)  connected  it  himself  with  the 
account  of  Judas'  compact  with  the  Rulers,  and  in  so  doing  was 
followed  by  Matthew,  Luke  omitting  all  mention  of  the  meal,  in 
view  of  a  similar  incident  narrated  by  him  in  the  record  of  the 
Galilean  ministry  (7  :  36-50).  In  the  house  of  Simon  the  leper: 
The  Fourth  Gospel  represents  the  house  as  Martha's  (12  :  2),  and 
does  not  introduce  the  name  Simon  into  his  account.  Simon  may 
have  been  the  father  of  the  family  and  separated  from  them  by  his 
disease,  or  cured  from  it  and  still  known  by  the  name  of  "leper,"  as 
Matthew  was  by  the  name  of  "publican"  after  he  had  become  a 
disciple  (Matt.  10  :  3),  or  he  may  have  been  no  longer  ahve.  The 
mention  of  his  name  in  connection  with  the  house  does  not  necessitate 
his  having  been  present  as  host.  A  woman:  The  Fourth  Evangelist 
indicates  the  woman  as  Mary,  the  sister  of  Martha  who  served,  and 
adds  that  Lazarus  was  one  of  the  guests  (cf.  12  :  2f.  with  11  :  2). 
An  alabaster  cruse  (ht.  an  alabaster,  a  box  or  flask,  usually, 
though  not  necessarily,  made  of  that  substance — so  named  from 
Alabastron  in  Egypt,  where  the  stone  was  found  and  where  a  local 
manufacture  of  perfume  vases  was  carried  on,  Ptolemseus,  IV,  5, 
§  39.  The  m.aterial  was  supposed  to  preserve  the  aroma  of  the  per- 
fumes) of  ointment:  John  substitutes  the  weight  of  the  ointment 
("a  pound")  for  the  flask  that  contamed  it  (12  13).  Pure  (lit. 
trustworthy)  nard  (so  only  Mark  and  John,  12:3.  Matthew  does  not 
name  the  ointment,  26  :  7):  Nard  (rendered  "  spikenard "_  in  A.  V., 
from  the  spiked  or  shaggy  leaves  from  which  the  perfume  is  secured) 
is  a  product  of  the  Nardostachys  Jatamansi,  a  species  of  Valerian 
native  to  the  Himalayan  region  of  Northern  and  Eastern  India 
(Tristram,  Natural  History  of  the  Bible,  p.  485)-  It  was  used  by 
wealthy  Hebrews  (Song  i  :  12;  4  :  i3f.),  later  by  Greeks  and  Romans. 
Because  it  was  very  costly,  it  was  often  adulterated.  Here  it  was  used 
pure.  She  broke  the  cruse  (so  only  in  Mark)— the  long  neck  of  the 
flask,  so  that  the  ointment  might  be  more  readily  poured  out  and 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

4.  over  his  head.  But  there  were  some  that  had  in- 
dignation among  themselves,  saying,  To  what  pur- 

5.  pose  hath  this  waste  of  the  ointment  been  made? 
For  this  ointment  might  have  been  sold  for  above 
three  hundred  shillings,  and  given  to  the  poor. 
And  they  murmured  against  her.     But  Jesus  said, 

6.  Let    her    alone;    why    trouble    ye    her?    she   hath 

7.  wrought  a  good  work  on  me.  For  ye  have  the 
poor  always  with  you,  and  whensoever  ye  will  ye 
can  do  them  good:   but  me  ye  have  not  always. 

8.  She  hath  done  what  she  could;  she  hath  anointed 

9.  my  body  beforehand  for  the  burying.  And  verily 
I  say  unto  you.  Wheresoever   the  gospel   shall  be 

all  of  it  used,  rather  than  drop  by  drop  through  its  narrow  mouth  and 
most  of  it  retained  for  other  uses.  Poured  it  over  his  head  (John 
says,  "the  feet,"  12  :  3;  cf.  also  11  :  2,  his  memory  being  confused 
perhaps  by  his  reminiscence  of  Luke's  story  of  the  sinful  woman, 
7  :  38):  The  anointing  of  the  head  with  oil  was  a  customary  mark  of 
attention  to  a  guest  (Ps.  23  :  5;  Lk.  7  :  46). 

4,  5.  Some  (Matthew  says  "the  disciples,"  26  :  8;  John,  "Judas 
Iscariot,"  12  : 3)  .  .  .  had  indignation  (Ht.  were  indignant  to  them- 
selves, i.e.  expressed  their  indignation  among  themselves,  cf.  16  :  3):  The 
disciples,  being  accustomed  only  to  simple  living,  would  be  quite 
likely  to  be  the  ones  sensitive  to  the  obvious  extravagance;  Judas, 
being  distinctively  mercenary,  might  well  be  the  one  who  voiced  the 
protest.  Three  hundred  shillings  (lit.  denarii) — about  $51  in  nom- 
inal value.  Given  to  the  poor:  From  6  .-37,  we  may  infer  that  the 
cost  of  the  ointment  would  have  fed  many  thousands  of  the  hungry 
poor.  This  fact  may  have  been  called  to  their  mind  significantly  at 
the  Passover  time,  when  such  alms  were  specially  expected  (cf.  Jn. 
13  :  29).  Murmured  against  her — not  for  her  attention  to  the 
Master  in  itself,  but  in  its  wastefulness,  as  ordinary  oil  would  have 
served  all  the  purpose  of  respect,  and  in  its  incongruity,  as  the  Mas- 
ter's spirit  was  known  to  be  one  of  benevolence  to  the  poor  (cf. 
10  :  21). 

6-9.  The  Master's  rebuke  of  the  protest  was  a  commendation  of 
the  act.  From  a  utilitarian  point  of  view,  it  was  not  in  accord  with  his 
teachings;  but  as  the  expression  of  a  deep-seated  love,  it  was  a  goodly 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

preached  throughout  the  whole  world,  that  also  which 
this  woman  hath  done  shall  be  spoken  of  for  a  memo- 
rial of  her. 

act.  For  this  act,  conscious  of  what  lay  before  him  of  the  hatred  of 
the  human  heart,  he  was  profoundly  grateful,  and  knowing  not  only 
what  he  had  done  for  Mary  in  the  restoration  of  her  brother  to  life 
(Jn.  11  :  43f.),  but  what  he  had  become  to  her  in  his  teaching  (Lk. 
lo  :  39-42),  he  accepted  it  as  a  rightful  tribute  to  himself.  The 
poor  they  had  always  with  them,  and  they  could  serve  them  when- 
soever they  would,  but  himself  they  would  not  have  always.  If  they 
realized  that,  as  he  did,  they  would  not  have  objected  to  this  spon- 
taneous outpouring  of  Mary's  love,  but  would  have  been  stimulated 
by  it  to  an  expression  of  such  love  as  they  themselves  possessed. 
What  she  had  done  was  what  she  could  do  (only  in  Mark).  It  was 
measured  up  to  her  means  and  station  in  life.  Instead  of  criticising, 
they  might  well  have  given  a  proportioned  expression  to  their  love 
for  him.  She  doubtless  had  no  premonition  of  his  coming  death;  his 
disciples,  in  view  of  his  repeated  announcements  to  them  of  his 
passion,  should  have  had  some.  To  make  their  protest,  therefore, 
all  the  less  excusable,  he  interprets  her  act  as  an  anticipated  anointing 
of  his  dead  body — not  its  embalming,  which  was  not  a  Hebrew  but  an 
Egyptian  custom  (Gen.  50  :  2f.,  26),  but  its  anointing  with  spices 
and  oils  after  it  had  been  washed  (cf.  16  :  i;  Acts  9  :  37;  Jn.  19  :  39f.), 
with  a  view  to  its  preparation  for  the  burying.  John  modifies  the 
Master's  words,  though  he  retains  the  idea,  12  :  7.  Wheresoever 
this  Gospel  shall  be  preached:  What  is  announced  later  in  13  :  10 
is  here  assumed  (Swete,  ad.  loc).  Shall  be  spoken  of:  He  does  not 
make  this  an  organic  part  of  his  Gospel,  but  intimates  that  when  his 
followers  come  to  tell  the  story  of  his  mission  and  message  to  the 
world,  they  will  have  so  appreciated  Mary's  act  that  they  will  ever 
recall  it  for  the  generous  expression  of  the  personal  love  and  devotion 
it  actually  was.  This  is  omitted  by  the  Fourth  Evangelist.  Judas 
Iscariot  (cf .  notes  on  3  :  19)  .  .  .  went  away  unto  the  chief  priests — 
not  necessarily  immediately  after  the  supper,  as  Matthew  seems  to 
imply,  26  :  14,  but  as  incited  by  the  supper's  episode  to  arrange  with 
the  Rulers  for  the  Master's  apprehension.  Just  how  he  was  moved 
to  this  act  by  what  had  taken  place  it  may  be  impossible  definitely 
to  say.  Perhaps  the  Master's  significant  statement  as  to  his  burial 
may  have  led  Judas  to  the  desperate  idea  that  only  by  Jesus'  arrest 
would  he  be  forced  to  declare  his  Messianic  Kingship  and  so  bring 
to  realization  the  material  kingdom  which  he  selfishly  hoped  the 
Master  would  establish,  or  his  resentment  at  the  wasteful  use  of 
money,  which  otherwise  might  have  come  into  his  hands,  and  his 

203 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

10.  And  Judas  Iscariot,  ^  he  that  was  one  of  the  twelve, 
went  away  unto  the  chief  priests,  that  he  might  de- 

11.  liver  him  unto  them.  And  they,  when  they  heard  it, 
were  glad,  and  promised  to  give  him  money.  And  he 
sought  how  he  might  conveniently  deliver  him  unto  them. 

12.  And  on  the  first  day  of  unleavened  bread,  when 
they  sacrificed  the  passover,  his  disciples  say  unto 
him.  Where  wilt  thou  that  we  go  and  make  ready  that 

1  Grk.  the  one  of  the  twelve. 

suspicion  that  the  Master  had  already  discovered  his  thieving  habits 
(cf.  Jn.  12  :  6)  may  have  driven  him  to  sever  once  for  all  his  connec- 
tion with  the  Cause  and  give  himself  over  to  the  things  which  would 
better  minister  to  his  greed.  Probably  the  incident  had  wrought 
upon  him  in  all  directions.  And  they  .  .  .  were  glad :  His  conference 
with  the  Priests  could  hardly  have  occurred  before  the  consultation 
of  the  Sanhedrists  among  themselves,  referred  to  in  ver.  if.;  otherwise 
there  would  have  been  some  evidence  of  his  connection  with  the 
scheme.  On  the  other  hand,  his  conference  with  the  Priests  did  not 
necessarily  result  in  a  plan  to  take  Jesus  during  the  feast,  much  less 
in  an  agreement  on  Ju<^as'  part  to  their  purpose  to  kill  him.  It  simply 
made  Judas  an  instrument  in  the  carrying  out  of  their  general  design 
to  get  Jesus  into  their  power — they  promising  to  give  him  money 
and  he  seeking  how  he  might  conveniently  {i.e.  without  creating  a 
disturbance.  Luke  says  distinctly  "in  the  absence  of  the  multitude," 
22  :  6)  deliver  him  into  their  hands.  That  the  betrayal  finally  took 
place  during  the  feast  was  doubtless  as  much  unexpected  by  Judas 
as  by  the  Rulers,  being  made  unavoidable  by  the  Master's  disclosure 
of  his  knowledge  of  the  plot  (Jn.  i3-26f.).  Matthew  alone  mentions 
the  amount  of  money  which  he  received  by  the  compact — "thirty 
pieces  of  silver"  (26  :  15;  cf.  Zech.  11  :  12),  in  value  about  two-fifths 
of  what  the  spikenard  had  cost,  though  this  may  have  been  merely 
earnest  money — Mark's  mention  of  the  promise  of  money  apparently 
referring  to  a  sum  yet  to  come. 

(2)  The  Last  Supper,  14  :  12-25 

12,  The  first  day  (Luke  simply,  "the  day,"  22  :  7)  of  unleavened 
bread:  This  was  Thursday  of  Holy  Week,  the  14th  Nisan  of  the 
Jewish  calendar,  which  extended  from  the  evening  of  the  13th  to 
the  evening  of  the  14th,  when  the  15th  began  and  the  Paschal  Meal 
was  eaten  (Ex.  12:8).    It  was  really  the  day  of  preparation  for  the 

204 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


13.  thou  mayest  eat  the  passover?  And  he  sendeth  two 
of  his  disciples,  and  saith  unto  them,  Go  into  the  city, 
and  there  shall  meet  you  a  man  bearing  a  pitcher 

14.  of  water:  follow  him;  and  wheresoever  he  shall  enter 
in,  say  to  the  master  of  the  house,  The  Teacher  saith, 
Where  is  my  guest-chamber,  where  I  shall  eat  the 

15.  passover  with  my  disciples?  And  he  will  himself  show 
you  a  large  upper  room  furnished  and  ready:  and 

16.  there  make  ready  for  us.  And  the  disciples  went  forth, 
and  came  into  the  city,  and  found  as  he  had  said 
unto  them:  and  they  made  ready  the  passover. 

feast  when  (on  the  evening  of  the  13th)  the  homes  were  searched  for 
the  removal  of  all  leaven  and  before  noon  (on  the  14th)  unleavened 
bread  began  to  be  eaten.  It  was  also  the  day  when  they  sacrificed 
the  passover,  i.e.  the  passover  lamb  (see  margin  of  Ex.  12  :  6).  This 
was  usually  done  by  the  head  of  the  family  with  sacrificial  ceremony 
in  the  court  of  the  Priests,  on  occasions,  by  the  Priests  themselves 
(Edersheim,  Tm/'/e,?.  igoff.).  Where  wUt  thou  that  we  .  .  .  make 
ready  that  thou  mayest  eat  the  passover?  The  meal  had  to  be  eaten 
within  the  city  and  the  Master  was  still  in  retirement  outside  (ver. 
13).  Luke  represents  Jesus  as  taking  the  initiative,  though  the  dis- 
ciples ask  him  as  to  the  specific  place  (22  :  8f.).  Beyond  the  providing 
of  the  place,  the  preparation  for  the  meal  itself  was  considerable. 

13-16.  Two  of  the  disciples:  Matthew  makes  no  mention  of  the 
number,  26  :  18;  Luke,  on  the  other  hand,  gives  their  names,  "Peter 
and  John,"  22:8.  There  shall  meet  you  a  man  bearing  a  pitcher  of 
water  (so  only  Mark  and  Luke,  22  :  10;  Matthew  makes  no  mention 
of  the  man,  26  :  18):  As  in  the  preparations  for  the  Triumphal  Entry, 
the  details  are  presented  in  a  way  to  leave  the  impression  oi  fore- 
knowledge on  the  Master's  part,  at  least  with  regard  to  their  being 
met  by  the  man  (see  notes  on  11  :  3).  As  water  carrying  was  usually 
the  task  of  women,  the  detection  of  this  servant  of  the  house  (cf. 
Deut.  29  :  11)  would  be  a  relatively  simple  simple  matter  for  the 
disciples.  The  water  was  doubtless  for  the  ablutions  of  the  sacred 
meal  and  had  been  drawn  from  the  Pool  of  Siloam.  They  were  to 
follow  him  through  the  streets  until  they  came  to  the  house  where 
the  Master  may  have  already  arranged  for  the  eating  of  the  meal. 
They  were  then  to  inquire  for  the  accommodations  of  the  master  of 
the  house  in  the  name  of  the  Teacher— making  it  more  than  probable 

205 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

17.  And  when  it  was  evening  he  cometh  with  the  twelve. 

18.  And  as  they  sat  and  were  eating,  Jesus  said,  Verily 
I  say  unto  you.  One  of  you  shall  betray  me,  even 

that  their  host  was  himself  a  disciple,  as  may  possibly  have  been  the 
case  with  the  owners  of  the  colt  (cf.  11  :  3-6).  The  master  of  the 
house  would  then  show  them  a  large  upper  room  furnished  and 
ready,  i.e.  provided  with  the  necessary  table  and  recHning  couches  and 
spread  with  the  needed  table  ware.  There  they  were  to  make  ready 
the  meal.  These  instructions  they  carried  out.  Mark  and  Luke 
(22  :  10-13)  alone  give  these  details.  Matthew  contents  himself 
with  the  general  direction  and  its  accomphshment  (26  :  i8f.).  The 
Fourth  Gospel  has  no  account  at  aU  of  the  preparation. 

The  diflference  between  the  Passion  chronology  of  the  Synoptics 
and  that  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  cannot  be  reconciled.  As  stated  above 
(notes  on  ver.  12)  the  Synoptists  place  the  Last  Supper  on  the  evening 
which  ushered  in  the  15  th  Nisan — the  evening  following  the  Day  of 
Preparation;  on  the  other  hand,  the  Fourth  Gospel  states  that  the 
meal  was  eaten  on  the  evening  which  ushered  in  the  14th  Nisan — the 
evening  beginning  the  Day  of  Preparation  (i3:i;i8:28;i9:i4). 
According  to  the  Fourth  Gospel's  view,  therefore,  the  meal  which 
was  eaten  was  not  the  Paschal  Meal,  but  a  private  meal  eaten  with 
the  disciples — the  Paschal  Meal  still  remaining  to  be  eaten  after  the 
trial  and  the  crucifixion  (18  :  28;  19  :  14,  31). 

As  between  these  two  chronologies  that  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  would 
seem  to  be  the  more  consistent;  for  if  the  Last  Supper  was  identical 
with  the  Paschal  Meal,  as  intimated  by  the  Synoptists,  it  is  difficult 
to  account  for  the  secular  activities  which  followed — the  arrest  by  an 
armed  band  from  the  Temple,  the  gathering  of  the  Sanhedrists  for 
the  trial,  the  prosecution  of  the  case  before  Pilate,  and  the  crowding 
of  the  Priests  out  to  the  place  of  crucifixion.  It  is  possible,  of  course, 
that  the  urgency  of  the  case  may  have  forced  the  Sanhedrists  to  the 
profanation  of  the  day;  but  it  is  not  hkely,  and  there  is  no  hint  given 
in  the  Synoptics  that  the  day  was  being  profaned.  In  fact,  Luke's 
statement  would  seem  to  indicate  that  the  day  of  the  Paschal  Meal 
was  still  to  come;  for  he  records  Jesus  as  saying  that  while  it  was  his 
desire  to  eat  the  Passover  with  his  disciples  before  he  suffered,  he 
would  nevertheless  not  eat  of  it  "until  it  be  fulfilled  in  the  Kingdom 
of  God"  (22  :  14-16).  For  an  argument  in  favor  of  the  agreement  of 
the  two  accounts  see  Smith,  In  the  Days  of  His  Flesh,  Appendix  VIII, 
pp.  533-539. 

17-21.  And  when  it  was  evening  (of  the  14th,  i.e.  the  beginning 
of  the  15th  Nisan.  The  Fourth  Gospel  states  that  the  meal  was 
eaten  on  the  evening  of  the  13th  Nisan,  i.e.  on  the  beginning  of  the 

206 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

19.  he  that  eateth  with  me.    They  began  to  be  sorrowful, 

20.  and  to  say  unto  him  one  by  one,  Is  it  I?    And  he 
said  unto  them,  //  is  one  of  the  twelve,  he  that  dippeth 

14th,  Jn.  13  :  i;  18  :  28;  19  :  14)  the  Master  cometh  with  the  twelve 
into  the  city  to  the  place  where  the  preparation  had  been  made. 
And  as  they  sat  (Ut.  reclined)  and  were  eating:  Luke  inserts  here 
remarks  with  which  the  Master  introduced  the  meal  and  indicated  to 
the  disciples  the  peculiar  significance  it  had  for  him  in  view  of  his 
impending  passion  and  follows  it  (inaccurately)  with  an  account  of 
the  drinking  of  a  cup  before  the  breaking  of  the  bread  (22  :  15-18); 
John  recites  the  Master's  washing  of  the  disciples'  feet,  with  his 
interpreting  remarks  (13  :  1-20).  Matthew  follows  Mark  in  omitting 
these  items  and  recounting  as  the  first  incident  of  the  meal  the 
Master's  reference  to  his  coming  betrayal  (26  :  21-24).  One  of  you 
shall  betray  me,  Mark  adding  he  that  eateth  with  me  (which  Luke 
recasts  in  a  more  rhetorical  statement,  22  :  21):  This  does  not  single 
out  the  individual,  being  intended  to  call  attention  to  the  treachery, 
rather  than  to  the  traitor.  They  began  to  be  sorrowful:  (Matthew 
puts  it  more  strongly,  "exceedingly  sorrowful,"  26  :  22.  Neither  Luke 
nor  John  refer  to  the  sorrow):  The  indefiniteness  with  which  the 
Master  had,  on  previous  occasions,  referred  to  the  fact  of  his  coming 
betrayal  (cf.  Matt.  17  :  22;  20  :  18;  26  :  2;  Jn.  6  :  71)  had  given  the 
disciples  no  intimation  of  the  fact  that  it  was  to  be  accomplished  by 
one  of  their  own  number.  The  shock  of  the  Master's  statement, 
therefore,  can  be  easily  understood.  It  was  unbelievable!  John 
speaks  of  the  "doubt"  with  which  they  looked  at  each  other,  as 
though  they  sought  some  confirmation  of  the  statement  in  the  faces 
at  the  table  (13  :  22).  Luke  states  what  must  have  followed:  "They 
began  to  question  among  themselves  which  of  them  it  was  that  should 
do  this  thing"  (22  :  23).  Mark  and  Matthew  (26  :  22)  mention  only 
the  indi\'idual  inquiring  of  the  Master  into  which  their  startled  fear 
at  last  broke  forth,  Is  it  I  (lit.  It  is  not  I,  is  it)?  It  was  a  general 
and  confused  questioning  which  allowed  no  individual  answers — the 
only  definite  reply  being  the  answer  which  he  gave  to  the  inquiry 
suggested  by  Peter  through  John,  as  to  the  traitor's  identity  (13  :  23- 
25).  This  answer,  however,  seems  to  have  been  given  to  the  Beloved 
Disciple  privately  and  not  communicated  by  him  to  the  rest;  since 
they  seemed  to  be  still  unaware  of  the  traitor's  identity  when  Judas 
left  the  room  (vs.  27-29).  To  the  company  in  general  the  Master 
answered  merely,  one  of  the  twelve,  he  that  dippeth  with  me  in  the 
dish — the  dish  of  sauce — the  Charoseth — into  which  at  a  certain  time 
of  the  meal  the  master  of  the  feast  dipped  pieces  of  the  unleavened 
bread  with  bitter  herbs  between  them,  and  handed  them  to  the  guests 

207 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

21.  with  me  in  the  dish.  For  the  Son  of  man  goeth,  even 
as  it  is  written  of  him:  but  woe  unto  that  man  through 
whom  the  Son  of  man  is  betrayed!  good  were  it 
^  for  that  man  if  he  had  not  been  bom. 

22.  And  as  they  were  eating,  he  took  ^  bread,  and  when 
he  had  blessed,  he  brake  it,  and  gave  to  them,  and 

1  Grk.  jor  him  if  that  man  had  not.  ^  a  loaf. 

(J.  Lightfoot,  Matthew,  ad.  loc).  This  general  statement  of  the  Mas- 
ter's, while  emphasizing  more  forcibly  the  betrayal  of  the  common 
fellowship  (cf.  Ps.  41  : 9)  they  had  with  him,  obviously  did  not  yet 
identify  the  traitor  and,  with  the  following  solemn  words  of  woe, 
apparently  left  the  disciples  in  a  benumbed  state  of  mind,  which  did 
not  press  for  further  information.  Matthew,  while  following  Mark, 
adds  the  most  unlikely  fact  that  Judas  asked  definitely  whether  he 
himself  was  meant,  and  that  the  Master  answered  "Thou  hast  said" 
(26  :  25).  The  Fourth  Gospel  states  definitely  and  in  accordance 
with  the  ritual  of  the  meal,  that  Jesus,  in  reply  to  John's  question, 
said,  "It  is  he  for  whom  I  shall  dip  the  sop  and  give  it  to  him.  So 
when  he  had  dipped  the  sop,  he  taketh  and  giveth  it  to  Judas"  (13  : 
26).  Luke  makes  no  reference  to  the  dish  or  to  the  indication  of  the 
traitor.  For  the  Son  of  man  goeth  (properly,  goeth  away,  i.e.  out  of 
the  world)  even  as  it  is  written  of  him  (Luke,  "as  it  hath  been  deter- 
mined," 22  :  22):  This  confirms  the  announcement  of  the  betrayal 
by  the  statement  that  the  death  which  was  dependent  upon  it  was  a 
fulfilment  of  the  prophetic  forecast  of  Scripture  (Isa.  53d  ch.).  The 
betrayal,  thus,  was  not  a  happening  of  chance,  but  essentially  a  part 
of  the  predicted  and  predetermined  Passion  of  the  Son  of  Man,  and 
yet,  Woe  unto  that  man  by  whom  the  Son  of  man  is  betrayed !  for 
that  betrayal  was  the  free  act  of  a  moral  agent  and  must  bring  upon 
itself,  in  perfect  justice,  its  awful  punishment  (cf.  Lk.  22  13;  Jn. 
13  :  2).  This  "woe,"  therefore,  is  not  a  vindictive  curse,  but  a  sorrow- 
ful proclamation  of  the  inevitable  judgment.  (See  Hogg,  Christ's 
Message  of  the  Kingdom,  pp.  195-198).  Good  were  it  for  that  man 
if  he  had  never  been  bom — more  severe  than  the  somewhat  similar 
expression  of  9  :  42.  Luke  follows  this  incident  with  an  account  of  a 
contention  among  the  disciples  as  to  which  of  them  was  accounted 
greatest  (22  :  24-30),  a  most  unlikely  dispute  to  follow  such  a  solemn 
experience  as  they  had  just  had,  and,  therefore,  more  likely  a  recital 
of  what  occurred  as  the  occasion  of  the  feet-washing  before  the  feast, 
as  recorded  by  the  Fourth  Gospel  (13  :  4). 

22-25.  The  giving  of  the  sop  was  followed  by  the  departure  of 

208 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

23.  said,  Take  ye:  this  is  my  body.    And  he  took  a  cup, 
and  when  he  had  given  thanks,  he  gave  to  them :  and 

24.  they  all  drank  of  it.    And  he  said  unto  them,  This  is 
my  blood  of  the  ^  covenant,  which  is  poured  out  for 

1  Some  MSS.  insert  new. 

Judas  (Jn.  13  :  30),  the  significance  of  which,  in  spite  of  the  Master's 
words  (Jn.  13  :  27),  seems  to  have  been  hidden  from  the  rest  of  the 
disciples  (Jn.  13  :  28f.).  After  the  interruption  occasioned  by  the 
announcement  of  the  betrayal,  the  meal  proceeded.  It  is  impossible, 
however,  to  say  definitely  at  just  which  one  of  its  remaining  stages 
the  usual  form  of  observance  was  departed  from  by  the  Master,  in 
order  to  use  the  materials  of  the  meal  to  show  the  spiritual  significance 
of  his  death.  He  took  bread — one  of  the  round  cakes  of  unleavened 
bread,  placed  before  the  one  who  presided  over  the  feast.  And  when 
he  had  blessed  (Luke,  "had  given  thanks,"  22  :  19;  so  also  Paul, 
I  Cor.  1 1  :  24) — doubtless  one  of  the  formal  blessings  used  in  connec- 
tion with  the  meal,  and,  therefore,  different  from  that  employed  at 
the  feeding  of  the  multitude  (see  notes  on  6  :  41).  He  brake  it  and 
gave  to  them — for  their  own  use  and  not,  as  at  the  miraculous  feed- 
ing, for  the  use  of  others  (6  :4i).  Take  ye  (Matthew  inaccurately 
adds,  "eat,"  26  :  26;  Luke  omits  both  commands,  22  :  19),  this  is 
my  body  (Luke,  who  is  here  not  primary,  omits  "take"  and  adds 
"which  is  given  for  you:  this  do  in  remembrance  of  me,"  22  :  19, 
cf  I  Cor.  II  :  24).  This,  of  course,  cannot  have  been  intended  by  the 
Master  to  be  understood  literally;  since,  as  he  spoke,  his  body  stood 
before  them  separate  and  distinct  from  the  bread.  It  was  meant 
to  be  taken  figuratively,  as  his  statement  regarding  the  cup  (Lk. 
22  :  20).  The  bread  represented,  symbolized,  his  body.  As  this 
bread  was  given  to  them,  so,  in  this  impending  final  conflict  between 
his  spiritual  mission  and  the  materialism  of  the  Jews,  his  body  was 
to  be  given,  willingly,  freely,  to  estabhsh  for  them — and  for  all  people 
— his  kingdom  of  spiritual  righteousness  in  the  world.  More  than 
this  he  does  not  say;  but  if  they  remembered  his  discourse  in  the 
Capernaum  Synagogue,  they  as  Orientals  would  understand  that  as 
by  eating  this  bread  they  secured  its  physical  benefits,  so  by  personal 
fellowship  and  communion  with  him  would  they  be  spiritually  feed- 
ing upon  his  body  and  partaking  of  the  blessings  which  its  giving  up 
in  death  was  to  secure  for  them  (cf.  Jn.  6  :  51,  53-58).  And  he  took 
a  cup:  As  it  is  impossible  definitely  to  state  at  what  stage  in  the 
meal  this  symbolizing  of  the  materials  took  place  (see  above,  ver.  22), 
so  it  is  impossible  to  identify  this  cup  among  the  four  which  were 
drunk  at  the  meal — except  that  it  was  not  the  first  cup,  which  came 

209 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

25.  many.  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  I  shall  no  more  drink 
of  the  fruit  of  the  vine,  until  that  day  when  I  drink 
it  new  in  the  kingdom  of  God. 

as  the  guests  reclined  themselves  at  the  table.  Possibly,  in  view  of 
the  declaration  of  ver.  25,  it  may  have  been  the  fourth,  or  last  cup, 
which  closed  the  Meal  (cf.  Lk,  22  :  20;  i  Cor.  11  :  25,  where  it  is 
stated  that  the  cup  was  taken  "after  supper,"  though  Luke  here, 
as  in  19b,  is  not  primary).  And  when  he  had  given  thanks — as  he 
had  done  in  connection  with  the  bread.  The  diflference  in  the  terms 
does  not  indicate  any  essential  difference  in  the  acts — as  though  in 
the  one  case  he  had  invoked  a  blessing  upon  the  bread  and  in  the 
other,  had  given  thanks  for  the  wine — since  invocations  at  Jewish 
meals,  as  a  general  thing,  mingled  thanksgiving  with  blessing.  And 
they  all  drank  of  it:  Matthew,  in  the  spirit  of  a  later  confessionalism, 
turns  this  into  a  command  of  the  Master's,  "Drink  ye  all  of  it," 
(26  :  27).  This  is  my  blood  of  the  Covenant,  which  is  poured  out 
for  many  (Matthew  adds  a  statement  of  the  purpose  of  this  out- 
pouring, expressed  in  the  phrase  with  which  the  early  Apostolic 
preaching  proclaimed  the  object  and  the  outcome  of  repentance  and 
baptism  [cf.  Acts  2  :  38;  22  :  16]  and  the  result  of  faith  [cf.  Acts  10  : 
43;  13  '•  38.  See  notes  on  i  :  4]:  Luke  phrases  it  "the  new  covenant 
in  my  blood  [following  Paul,  cf.  i  Cor.  11  :  25I,  even  that  which  is 
poured  out  for  you,"  22  :  20).  The  thought  of  the  Master  was  sug- 
gested naturally  by  the  words  of  Ex.  24  :  8,  where  the  ancient  cove- 
nant of  God  with  Israel  was  sealed  with  the  blood  of  the  sacrifice, 
and  his  meaning  was  that  in  the  offering  up  of  his  life  in  this  conflict 
of  his  spiritual  mission  with  the  materialism  of  the  Nation  there 
would  be  estabhshed  a  spiritual  covenant  with  his  followers  in  which 
would  be  confirmed  and  assured  all  that  his  mission  had  come  to  ac- 
compHsh  in  the  world  (cf.  Jer.  31  :  31-33).  I  shall  no  more  drink 
of  the  fruit  of  the  vine,  imtil  that  day  when  I  drink  it  new  in  the 
kingdom  of  God  (Luke,  inaccurately,  connects  these  words  with  the 
partaking  of  the  initial  cup  and  the  first  bread  of  the  meal,  22  :  14-18) 
— not  merely  a  renewed  announcement  of  the  nearness  of  this  sacrifice 
of  himself,  but  an  assertion  of  the  ultimate  triumph  of  the  spiritual 
kingdom  he  was  giving  his  hfe  to  establish.  While  it  is  evident  that 
Jesus  added  no  direction  as  to  the  continued  observance  of  this  meal 
by  his  followers,  it  is  just  as  clear  that  the  significance  which  he 
placed  upon  its  symbolism  of  this  coming  supreme  self-sacrificing 
act  of  his  mission  would  make  it  as  impossible  for  his  followers  not 
to  keep  it  in  mind  by  a  recurrent  observance  of  it,  as  the  Master  him- 
self declared  it  wbuld  be  impossible  for  him  to  forget  it  till  the  consum- 
mation of  his  kingdom  brought  himself  and  his  followers  together  in  the 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

26.      And  when  they  had  sung  a  hymn,  they  went  out 
unto  the  mount  of  Olives. 


marriage  supper  of  the  Lamb.  It  does  no  violence,  therefore,  to  the 
simple  narrative  which  the  Gospel  gives,  to  find  implied  in  this  impres- 
sive modification  of  what  the  Synoptists  consider  the  Passover  meal — 
the  final  effort  to  bring  to  the  utmost  of  the  disciples'  understanding 
the  eternally  spiritual  meaning  of  the  death  to  which  he  was  now  going 
— that  intention  of  its  after  observance  which  is  given  us  in  Paul's  re- 
cital of  the  event  to  the  Corinthian  Church,  "This  do  in  remembrance 
of  me"  (i  Cor.  11  :  24f.).  The  Fourth  Gospel  gives  no  account  of  this 
specific  phase  of  the  meal  which  has  become  the  Lord's  Supper  of 
the  Christian  Church.  The  remarks  of  the  Master  leading  up  to  the 
pointing  out  of  the  traitor  and  his  withdrawal  from  the  room  (13  : 
12-30)  are  followed  by  the  v^aledictory  discourses,  which,  when  they 
are  recovered  from  their  present  displaced  condition,  arrange  them- 
selves most  probably  as  follows:  13  :  31a,  chs.  15,  16;  14  :  13  :  31b- 
38;  ch.  17.  At  the  passage  13  :  3ib-38  the  Johannine  record  is  paral- 
leled again  by  the  Synoptic  record  of  Mk.  14  :  27-31;  Matt.  26  :  31- 
35  and  Lk.  22  :  31-38. 

(j)  The  Departure  to  the  Mount  of  Olives,  with  the  Foretelling  of  the 
Desertion  and  the  Denial,  14  :  26-31 

26.  And  when  they  had  sting  a  hymn — in  all  likelihood,  the  re- 
maining portion  of  the  Hallel  (Ps.  11 5-1 18),  which  finally  ended  the 
Paschal  meal.  They  went  out  unto  the  Mount  of  OHves — where 
they  had  spent  their  nights  during  the  week  (cf.  Lk.  22  :  39);  so  that 
Peter's  question,  as  given  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  (13  :  36),  "Lord, 
whither  goest  thou?"  does  not  refer  to  the  closing  words  of  Ch.  14, 
"Arise,  let  us  go  hence";  for  this  would  be  understood  as  a  summons 
to  leave  for  their  place  of  customary  rest.  The  reference  is  to  the 
vague  declaration  (13  :  33),  "Ye  shall  seek  me:  and  as  I  said  unto 
the  Jews,  whither  I  go,  ye  cannot  come."  It  is  this  query  of  Peter's 
and  his  resentful  reply  to  the  Master's  answer  to  it  (13  :  36f.)  which 
most  probably  brought  from  Jesus  his  announcement  of  the  disciples' 
general  desertion  and  of  Peter's  personal  denial  of  him  which  were 
to  take  place  that  night.  Matthew  follows  Mark  in  representing 
the  departure  as  taking  place  before  the  disclosure  of  the  desertion 
of  the  disciples  (26  :3o).  Luke  (22  :  39)  and  John  (14  :  31)  place 
it  after.  The  rearrangement  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  material  would 
seem  to  suggest  that  along  with  the  Valedictory  Prayer,  it  came  after 
the  summons  to  leave,  but  before  the  actual  departure.  (See  closing 
paragraph  in  notes  on  ver.  25.) 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

27.  And  Jesus  saith  unto  them,  All  ye  shall  be  offended: 
for  it  is  written,  I  will  smite  the  shepherd,  and  the 

28.  sheep  shall  be  scattered  abroad.     Howbeit,  after  I 

29.  am  raised  up,  I  will  go  before  you  into  Galilee.    But 
Peter  said  unto  him.  Although  all  shall  be  offended, 

27-31.  All  ye  shall  be  offended  (lit.  caused  to  stimihle,  fitid  cause 
for  stumbling,  as  Lk.  7  :  23;  Matthew  adds  "in  me  this  night,"  26  :  31) : 
After  the  disclosure  to  them  at  the  Supper  that  one  of  their  number 
was  to  betray  the  Master  (ver.  18) — a  possibility  which  each  one 
seemed  to  disclaim  with  more  or  less  of  a  dread  as  to  what  his  own 
weakness  might  lead  him  to  do  (ver.  19) — this  announcement  that 
they  would  all,  without  exception,  fall  away  and  desert  him,  pre- 
sumably in  his  hour  of  need,  must  have  been  overwhelmingly  startling 
to  them,  and  yet  it  was  a  situation  which  the  Master  might  easily 
forecast,  from  his  intimate  knowledge  of  the  disciples  and  from  the 
disclosures  they  had  made  of  themselves  that  night.  For  it  is  writ- 
ten I  will  smite  the  shepherd,  and  the  sheep  shall  be  scattered 
abroad — taken  freely  from  Zech.  13  :  7,  where  Jehovah  calls  upon  the 
sword  to  smite  a  ruler,  who  is  abusing  his  place  and  position  as  Je- 
hovah's friend,  and  thus  scatter  his  sheep  abroad.  The  pertinency 
in  the  quoting  of  the  passage  here  lies  in  the  common  eJBfect  upon  the 
sheep  of  the  punishment  of  the  shepherd.  By  this  citing  of  Scripture 
the  Master  will  assure  to  the  disciples  the  prediction  he  has  just  made 
(cf.  ver.  21).  After  I  am  raised  up — which  was  to  be  but  a  brief 
time  (see  notes  on  8  :  31) — I  will  go  before  you  into  Galilee:  The 
absence  of  this  comforting  promise  and  any  fulfilment  of  it  from 
the  narrative  of  Luke — whose  whole  post-Resurrection  record  is 
confined  to  Jerusalem,  as  Matthew's  and  Mark's  are  restricted  to 
Galilee — is  evidence  merely  of  two  diflierent  but  not  necessarily  con- 
flicting traditions.  On  the  other  hand,  the  fact  that  while  Mark 
confirms  this  promise  in  16  :  7  (Matt.  28  :  7,  10),  there  is  no  record 
of  its  fulfilment  in  the  remainder  of  the  chapter  (as  there  is  in  Matt. 
28  :  16-19),  is  strong  corroborative  proof  that  the  latter  portion  of 
this  1 6th  chapter  is  not  its  original  ending.  But  Peter  said  .  .  .  Al- 
though all  shall  be  offended,  yet  will  not  I:  This  protest  of  Peter's 
doubtless  voiced  the  feelings  of  the  rest  of  the  Twelve,  as  later  (ver. 
31)  his  vehement  assertion  that  he  would  not  deny  his  Master  was 
repeated  by  them  all.  Thou  to-day,  even  this  night,  before  the  cock 
crow  twice,  shalt  deny  me  thrice:  Jesus'  reply  is  significant  in  its 
definiteness  of  statement,  as  though  he  would  once  and  for  all  de- 
stroy the  self-assurance  with  which  Peter  asserted  his  fidelity.  The 
Apostle's  self-confidence,  however,  based  as  it  was  on  a  failure  to 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

30.  yet  will  not  I.  And  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  Verily  I 
say  unto  thee,  that  thou  to-day,  even  this  night,  before 

31.  the  cock  crow  twice,  shalt  deny  me  thrice.  But  he 
spake  exceeding  vehemently,  If  I  must  die  with  thee, 
I  will  not  deny  thee.  And  in  like  manner  also  said 
they  all. 

32.  And  they  come  unto  a  place  which  was  named 
Gethsemane:  and  he  saith  unto  his  disciples.  Sit  ye 

realize  the  impending  events,  was  simply  strengthened  by  these 
words;  for  he  answered  exceeding  vehemently  (ht.  greatly  beyond 
measure.  So  only  Mark),  If  I  must  die  with  thee  (see  Jn.  11  :  16), 
I  will  not  deny  thee.  And  in  like  manner  also  said  they  all.  Doubt- 
less, they  had  been  startled  by  the  Master's  prediction  of  their  gen- 
eral defection  (ver.  27),  but  however  his  words  may  have  increased 
such  individual  dread  as  each  one  may  have  had  as  to  his  own  weak- 
ness, there  was  no  question  in  their  hearts  as  to  the  loyalty  they 
desired  to  show.  Consequently,  when  the  Master  met  Peter's  pro- 
test with  this  further  and  more  definite  forecast  of  his  specific  denial 
of  him,  the  impossibility  in  their  minds  of  such  an  event  expressed 
itself  in  the  same  passionate  way  as  with  Peter  himself.  The  definite- 
ness  of  the  Master's  forecast  does  not  necessarily  involve  a  super- 
natural foreknowledge  of  the  specific  details  of  Peter's  action.  "Be- 
fore the  cock  crow"  means  simply  before  dawn,  the  "twice"  which 
Mark  alone  has  being  evidently  read  back  into  the  statement  from 
Peter's  keen  memory  of  the  actual  occurrence  (ver.  72);  while  the 
"shalt  deny  me  thrice"  is  rather  to  warn  the  Apostle  of  the  aggra- 
vated character  of  the  disloyalty  he  is  to  show  than  to  predict  the 
number  of  times  it  is  to  be  expressed.  Luke  has  largely  modified  the 
record  of  this  incident,  prefacing  this  definite  statement  of  the  Mas- 
ter's with  a  warning  to  the  Apostle  which  betrays  later  elements  and 
which  is  followed  by  a  protest  from  the  Apostle  in  language  similar 
to  his  final  assertion,  which  the  Evangelist  omits  (22  :  31-33)-  This 
definite  prediction  of  Peter's  denial  is  also  followed  by  a  general  warn- 
ing to  the  Twelve  (22  :  35-38)  whose  wording  seems  to  refer  to  the 
instructions  previously  given  to  the  Seventy  (10:  4). 

(4)  The  Agony  in  Gethsemane,  14  :  32-42 

32.  They  come  unto  a  place  (lit.  a  piece  of  ground,  a  field)  .  .  . 
named  Gethsemane  (probable  meaning,  oil  press):  As  the  name 
indicates,  this  was  in  all  likelihood  an  enclosure  which  had  been 
originally  an  olive  orchard,  containing  an  oil  press,  but  had  been 

213 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

33.  here,  while  I  pray.  And  he  taketh  with  him  Peter 
and  ^  James  and  John,  and  began  to  be  greatly  amazed, 

34.  and  sore  troubled.  And  he  saith  unto  them.  My  soul 
is  exceeding  sorrowful  even  unto  death:  abide  ye  here, 

35.  and  watch.  And  he  went  forward  a  little,  and  fell 
on  the  ground,  and  prayed  that,  if  it  were  possible, 

36.  the  hour  might  pass  away  from  him.  And  he  said, 
Abba,  Father,  all  things  are  possible  unto  thee;  re- 
move this  cup  from  me:  howbeit  not  what  I  will,  but 

37.  what  thou  wilt.  And  he  cometh,  and  findeth  them 
sleeping,  and  saith  unto  Peter,  Simon,  sleepest  thou? 

38.  couldest  thou  not  watch  one  hour?    ^  Watch  and  pray, 

1  Jacoi.  2  Watch  ye,  and  pray  that  ye  enter  not. 

transformed  into  a  private  garden  (cf.  Jn.  18  :  i),  several  of  which 
apparently  existed  outside  the  city  walls  (cf.  Jn.  19:41).  The 
Fourth  Gospel  locates  it  apparently  just  across  the  Kidron  (18  :  i), 
in  which  case  its  site  would  be  most  probably  the  traditional  one, 
some  fifty  yards  beyond  the  Brook,  and,  as  Jesus  had  been  accustomed 
to  go  there  often  with  his  disciples  (Jn.  18  :  2),  Judas  and  his  company 
would  naturally  search  it  on  their  way  to  his  settled  resting  place 
for  the  night,  on  the  Mount  of  Olives  (Jn.  18  :  2f.).  Luke,  however, 
who  does  not  mention  its  name,  apparently  identifies  it  with  this 
resting  place  itself  (22  :  39f.;  see  notes  on  11  :  12).  In  either  case, 
the  place  would  be  well  known  to  the  Betrayer.  Sit  ye  here,  while 
I  pray:  The  disciples  are  bidden  to  remain  near  the  entrance,  while 
the  Master  goes  farther  into  the  enclosure  to  engage  in  prayer  by 
himself  cf.  i  :  35;  6  :  46;  see  notes  on  9  :  2. 

33-42.  Peter,  James  and  John:  While  his  instinct  was  to  be  alone 
in  his  communion  with  his  Father,  the  growing  fellowship  of  these 
three  with  himself  impelled  him  to  take  them  nearer  the  scene  of  his 
struggle,  as  before  he  had  taken  them  to  the  scene  of  his  transfigura- 
tion (cf.  Lk.  9  :  28).  Greatly  amazed  (so  alone  Mark):  Though  the 
Master  had  foreseen  the  outcome  of  his  mission  as  a  fact,  yet  as  he 
drew  near  its  realization  he  was  overwhelmed  with  its  significance  as 
the  answer  of  sin  to  the  love  of  God.  In  this  consciousness  of  its 
spiritual  meaning  was  naturally  involved  the  consternation  of  his 
human  soul  as  it  faced  the  death  which  was  involved  in  this  answer. 
As  a  consequence,  he  was  sore  troubled  .  .  .  even  unto  death 

214 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


that  ye  enter  not  into  temptation:  the  spirit  indeed 

39.  is  willing,  but  the  flesh  is  weak.    And  again  he  went 

40.  away,  and  prayed,  saying  the  same  words.  And  again 
he  came,  and  found  them  sleeping,  for  their  eyes  were 
very  heavy;  and  they  knew  not  what  to  answer  him. 

41.  And  he  cometh  the  third  time,  and  saith  unto  them, 
1  Sleep  on  now,  and  take  your  rest:  it  is  enough;  the 
hour  is  come;  behold,  the  Son  of  man  is  betrayed  into 

42.  the  hands  of  sinners.  Arise,  let  us  be  going:  behold, 
he  that  betrayeth  me  is  at  hand. 


'  Do  ye  sleep  on,  then,  and  take  your 


rest? 


{i.e.  his  suEfering  was  killing  him).  So  he  admits  to  the  three  disciples 
as  he  bids  them  wait  and  watch— not  as  guarding  against  an  attack, 
but  as  affording  him  the  support  of  their  presence— as  Matthew  s 
phrase,  "  watch  with  me,"  intimates  (26  :  38, 40).  If  it  were  possible, 
the  hour  (Mark,  alone,  whose  interpretation  it  apparently  is  of  the 
figurative  expression  "cup"  used  in  the  prayer,  by  Matthew,  26  :  39, 
and  by  Luke,  22  : 42)— might  pass  away  from  him:  This  petition 
that,  if  possible,  his  work  might  be  accomplished  without  the  coming 
to  hi'm  of  this  appointed  experience  is,  as  the  amazement  and  deadly 
sorrow  of  his  soul  indicate,  not  alone  a  plea  to  be  spared  the  physical 
pain  of  death,  but  much  more  the  awful  consciousness  which  it 
would  bring  with  it  of  the  reality  of  the  sin  of  the  wodd.  But  this 
plea  was  an  expression  of  the  horror  of  his  soul,  as  it  viewed  the  com- 
ing Passion,  not  the  disclosure  of  an  unwillingness  to  undergo  it. 
The  Father's  will  in  the  appointment  of  the  experience  was  supreme, 
even  as  the  petition  was  uttered.  Saith  imto  Peter— whose  boastful 
protestation  of  loyalty  to  his  Master  made  him  the  natural  object  of 
the  sorrowful  rebuke,  though  all  were  asleep.  Luke,  whose  record 
differs  greatly  from  the  others  and  betrays  some  elements  of  later 
tradition  {e.g.  vs.  43,  44),  says  that  their  sleeping  came  from  "sorrow' 
(22  :45).  Watch  and  pray:  To  the  former  charge  to  watch  with 
him  he  now  adds  the  warning  to  pray  for  themselves;  for  it  has  be- 
come now  a  matter  of  concern  whether  the  willingness  of  their  hearts 
to  be  faithful  to  him  would  withstand  the  human  fear  and  dread 
which  the  impending  attack  upon  him  would  arouse  within  them. 
They  are  to  pray,  as  he  had  already  done  particulariy  for  Peter  (Lk. 
22  •  3if.),  that  they  may  be  spared  the  hour  of  crisis;  but  if  not,  that 
they  may  be  firm  in  its  test.    Again  he  .  .  .  prayed— for  his  victory 


215 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

43.  And  straightway,  while  he  yet  spake,  cometh  Judas, 
one  of  the  twelve,  and  with  him  a  multitude  with 
swords  and  staves,  from  the  chief  priests  and  the 

44.  scribes  and  the  elders.  Now  he  that  betrayed  him 
had  given  them  a  token,  saying.  Whomsoever  I  shall 
kiss,  that  is  he;  take  him,  and  lead  him  away  safely. 

was  not  yet  complete.  When  at  last,  after  a  third  period  of  prayer, 
it  was  assured,  he  needed  their  watchful  sympathy  no  longer.  They 
had  proved  helpless  to  him  in  this  struggle  of  his  soul,  they  could 
sleep  on  now,  if  they  so  wished — the  struggle  which  would  seem  to 
them  more  fearsome  was  at  hand :  the  Son  of  man  is  betrayed  into  the 
hands  of  sinners.  But  it  is  enough,  the  sadly  justified  reproach  must 
give  way  to  the  summons  to  arise  and  be  going — evidently  back  to  the 
other  disciples — for  he  that  betrayeth  him  was  at  hand.  Luke  omits 
all  the  remainder  of  the  incident  after  the  warning  to  watch  and 
pray. 

(5)  The  Arrest,  14  :  43-52 

43.  One  of  the  twelve — not  to  describe  him,  but  to  express  anew 
the  consciousness  of  the  infamy  of  the  deed.  A  multitude :  According 
to  the  Synoptists,  the  arresting  party  was  an  unorganized  crowd, 
armed  only  with  the  short  swords  carried  by  private  persons  (cf. 
ver.  47)  and  staves,  or  stout  sticks.  It  was  such  a  crowd  as  might 
hastily  be  gathered  together  in  an  attack  upon  a  marauder  (cf.  ver. 
48).  It  was  evidently  placed  at  Judas'  disposal  by  the  members  of 
the  Sanhedrin  and  apparently  included  some  of  the  servants  of  the 
High  Priest  (cf.  ver.  47),  as  well  as  representatives  of  the  members  of 
that  high  court  (cf.  Lk.  22  :  52).  Luke  adds  to  them  the  officers  of 
the  Levitical  guard  of  the  Temple  (22  :  52;  cf.  Edersheim,  Temple, 
p.  119)  with  whom  he  states  Judas  consulted  when  he  made  arrange- 
ments for  the  betrayal  (22  14).  The  Fourth  Gospel  gives  a  much 
more  military  impression  of  the  undertaking  by  stating  that  the 
Sanhedrists  had  '*a  band  (properly,  a  cohort)  of  soldiers"  with  its 
"chief  captain"  (lit.  chiliarch)  and  that  these  were  armed  with 
regular  "weapons."  He  also  names  the  High  Priest's  servant, 
"Malchus"  (18  :3,  10,  12). 

44-47.  A  token  (lit.  a  concerted  signal) — since  it  was  night  and 
the  indiscriminate  character  of  the  crowd  gave  no  surety  of  their 
ability  to  distinguish  Jesus  in  the  confusion  which  was  likely  to 
arise.  This  is  omitted  by  Luke.  Kiss — not  the  affectionate  family 
greeting  on  the  cheek,  but  the  ordinary  greeting  of  a  pupil  to  his 

216 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

45.  And  when  he  was  come,  straightway  he  came  to  him, 

46.  and  saith,  Rabbi;  and  ^kissed  him.    And  they  laid 

47.  hands  on  him,  and  took  him.  But  a  certain  one  of 
them  that  stood  by  drew  his  sword,  and  smote  the 
^  servant  of  the  high  priest,  and  struck  off  his  ear. 

48.  And  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them,  Are  ye 
come  out,  as  against  a  robber,  with  swords  and  staves 

49.  to  seize  me?  I  was  daily  with  you  in  the  temple 
teaching,  and  ye  took  me  not :  but  this  is  done  that  the 

1  kissed  him  much.  2  Qrk.  bondservant. 

teacher — the  salutation,  "Rabbi,"  an  obeisance,  and  a  kiss  on  the 
hand  (cf.  ver.  45;  Matt.  26  :49).  Safely  (Ht.  securely):  The  idea  of 
Judas  was  not  to  avoid  violence,  but  to  accomplish  the  certain  carry- 
ing out  of  his  plan  which  would  naturally  seem  to  him  in  danger  of 
failure  now  that  Jesus  had  shown  his  knowledge  of  it.  Mark  alone 
refers  to  this  direction.  Luke  introduces  a  rebuking  protest  on  Jesus' 
part  as  the  kiss  was  given,  and  an  appeal  to  the  Master  on  the  part 
of  the  disciples  to  defend  him,  as  Judas'  purpose  disclosed  itself 
(22  :  48f.).  Matthew  represents  the  Master  as  addressing  Judas  on 
his  approach  with  a  remark,  the  meaning  of  which  in  the  original 
text  is  not  plain  (26  :  50).  Drew  his  sword  and  smote  the  servant  of 
the  high  priest:  Though  the  appeal  for  permission  to  defend  the 
Master  (Lk.  22  :  49)  was  doubtless  refused,  the  actual  laying  hold  of 
him  evidently  aroused  to  action  at  least  one  of  the  disciples — def- 
initely named  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  as  Peter  (18  :  10).  Matthew  at 
some  length  (26  :  52-54)  and  Luke  briefly  (22  :  51)  state  that  this 
impulsive  deed  was  rebuked  by  Jesus,  Luke  adding  that  he  healed  the 
wound.  John,  who  does  not  mention  the  kiss,  gives  a  detailed  state- 
ment representing  the  confusion  of  the  crowd  preceding  the  actual 
arrest,  intimating  apparently  that  it  arose  from  their  being  overawed 
in  some  way  by  his  presence  (18  :4-9).  He  also  records  the  at- 
tempted defence  and  the  rebuke  (18  :  11). 

48,  49.  The  Synoptists  unite  in  stating  that  the  arrest  was  followed 
by  a  protest  on  the  part  of  Jesus,  in  which  he  places  before  the  crowd 
the  evil  motive  which  must  have  lain  behind  the  secrecy  and  armed 
force  of  their  deed  (cf.  Matt.  26  :  55f.;  Lk.  22  :  52f.).  That  the 
Scriptures  might  be  fulfilled— referring  rather  to  the  spirit  of  such  a 
passage  as  Isa.  53,  than  to  any  specific  prediction  of  this  incident. 
Luke  omits  these  words,  but  gives  the  thought  which  they  contain 
(22  :  53b). 

217 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

50.  scriptures  might  be  fulfilled.    And  they  all  left  him, 
and  fled. 

51.  And  a  certain  young  man  followed  with  him,  having 
a  linen  cloth  cast  about  him,  over  his  naked  body: 

52.  and  they  lay  hold  on  him;  but  he  left  the  linen  cloth, 
and  fled  naked. 

53.  And  they  led  Jesus  away  to  the  high  priest:  and 
there  come  together  with  him  all  the  chief  priests  and 

50.  They  all  left  him  and  fled — disclosing  the  purely  impulsive 
character  of  their  attempted  defence  of  the  Master  and  his  clear 
insight  into  the  instability  of  their  protested  loyalty  to  him  (cf.  vs. 

27-31)- 

51,  52.  This  incident  is  peculiar  to  Mark.  It  contains  nothing  to 
disclose  the  identity  of  the  young  man,  beyond  the  fact  that  he  was 
not  one  of  the  Twelve.  That  his  attire  consisted  in  a  linen  cloth, 
cast  .  .  .  over  his  naked  body  shows  that  he  had  come  hastily 
to  the  scene,  perhaps  from  the  house  where  the  Meal  had  been 
eaten.  If  this  was  the  house  of  Mary,  the  mother  of  Mark  (cf.  Acts 
12  :  12),  this  stranger  may  have  been  the  Evangelist  himself  (cf. 
Zahn,  N.  T.  Introd.,  p.  49if.). 

(6)  The  Trial  before  the  Sanhedrin,  14  :  53-72 

53.  They  led  Jesus  away  to  the  high  priest:  The  Synoptists  agree 
in  recording  that  Jesus  was  brought  directly  to  the  high  priest,  whose 
name,  Caiaphas,  is  however  given  alone  by  Matthew  (26  :  57). 
There,  according  to  Matthew  (26  :  59-66)  and  Mark  (vs.  55-64),  he 
was  placed  on  trial  before  the  whole  Council,  which  Matthew  inti- 
mates was  already  gathered  together  in  anticipation  of  the  arrest 
(26  :  57),  but  is  described  by  Mark  as  assembling  upon  the  arrival  of 
Jesus  (ver.  54).  Luke  knows  nothing  of  an  immediate  trial,  but 
states  that  the  Council  was  assembled,  apparently  in  their  usual 
place  of  gathering  in  the  Temple,  "as  soon  as  it  was  day"  (22  :  66); 
while  John  records  a  preliminary  examination  of  the  Prisoner  by 
Annas,  whom  apparently  he  designates  as  "high  priest"  (18  :  19; 
cf.  Acts  4  :  6)  and  whom  he  describes  as  "father  in  law  to  Caiaphas 
which  was  high  priest  that  year"  (18  :  13).  After  the  examination  was 
over,  Annas  sent  him  to  Caiaphas  (18  :  24).  Of  a  trial  before  Caia- 
phas, or  before  the  Sanhedrin  in  his  presence,  this  Evangelist  ap- 
parently gives  no  record.  As  Mark  states,  however  (15  :  i),  that  the 
Prisoner  was  taken  away  to  Pilate  as  soon  as  it  was  dawn,  all  we  can 
infer  from  these  fragmentary  records  is  that  the  trial  consisted  in  a 

218 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

54.  the  elders  and  the  scribes.  And  Peter  had  followed 
him  afar  off,  even  within,  into  the  court  of  the  high 
priest;  and  he  was  sitting  with  the  oflScers,  and  warm- 

55.  ing  himself  in  the  light  of  the  fire.  Now  the  chief 
priests  and  the  whole  council  sought  witness  against 

56.  Jesus  to  put  him  to  death;  and  found  it  not.  For 
many  bare  false  witness  against  him,  and  their  witness 

57.  agreed  not  together.     And  there  stood  up  certain, 

58.  and  bare  false  witness  against  him,  saying,  We  heard 
him  say,  I  \vill  destroy  this  ^  temple  that  is  made  with 
hands,  and  in  three  days  I  will  build  another  made 

1  sanctuary. 

preliminary  examination  by  Annas,  following  which  the  trial  before 
the  Sanhedrists  took  place,  which  was  closed  by  a  personal  examina- 
tion of  the  Prisoner  by  Caiaphas.  All  the  chief  priests— the  ex-high 
priests,  as  Annas,  and  possibly  those  who  belonged  to  high-priestly 
families  (cf.  Acts  4:6;  and  see  Schiirer,  Jewish  People,  II,  i,  195-206). 
These,  together  with  the  eiders  and  the  scribes,  constituted  a  full 
though  informal  meeting  of  the  Sanhedrin  (Edersheim,  Jesus,  II, 

P-  557f-)- 

54.  Peter  had  followed  him  .  .  .  into  the  court  of  the  high 
priest — the  open  space  {atrium)  around  which  were  built  the  cham- 
bers of  the  palace,  in  one  of  the  upper  rooms  of  which  apparently 
(cf.  ver.  66)  the  Council  was  gathered.  Entrance  to  the  court  was 
gained  by  the  "forecourt"  (ver,  68,  marg.),  a  passageway  opening 
out  upon  the  street.  According  to  the  Fourth  Gospel,  Peter  secured 
admission  to  the  court,  through  the  good  services  of  "another  disci- 
ple" [John]  who  "was  known  unto  the  high  priest"  (18  :  isf.), 
his  purpose  being,  doubtless,  as  Matthew  states  it,  "to  see  the  end" 
(26  :  58).  He  seated  himself  with  the  officers  (lit.  servants — probably 
members  of  the  Temple  guard  who  had  made  the  arrest,  cf.  Lk. 
22  :  52) — around  "the  fire  of  charcoal"  (Jn.  18  :  18,  marg.)  which 
they  had  kindled  to  warm  themselves  (Jn.  18  :  18,  omitted  by  Mat- 
thew), for  at  the  altitude  of  Jerusalem  the  nights,  even  in  the  Spring- 
time, were  chilly,  especially  in  the  hours  before  sunrise. 

55-64.  Sought  witness :  This  was  not  a  formal  process  of  the  regular 
Council.  It  was  an  irregular  gathering  with  a  definite  purpose.  It 
was  not  to  try  a  case  brought  before  it  on  charges,  but  to  secure 
charges  on  which  to  carry  the  case  to  the  Roman  governor;  since,  in 

219 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

59.  without  hands.     And  not  even  so  did  their  witness 

60.  agree  together.  And  the  high  priest  stood  up  in  the 
midst,  and  asked  Jesus,  saying,  Answerest  thou 
nothing?  what  is  it  which  these  witness  against  thee? 

61.  But  he  held  his  peace,  and  answered  nothing.  Again 
the  high  priest  asked  him,  and  saith  unto  him,  Art 

62.  thou  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  Blessed?  And  Jesus 
said,  I  am:  and  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  sitting  at 
the  right  hand  of  Power,  and  coming  with  the  clouds 

63.  of  heaven.    And  the  high  priest  rent  his  clothes,  and 

64.  saith.  What  further  need  have  we  of  witnesses?  Ye 
have  heard  the  blasphemy:  what  think  ye?     And 

order  to  put  Jesus  to  death,  some  evidence  must  be  found  to  show 
that  he  had  mortally  offended  Jewish  law.  And  found  it  not — i.e.  did 
not  find  it  of  such  a  character  as  would  meet  the  requirements  of  the 
Law  (cf.  Num.  35  :  30;  Deut.  17  :  6;  19  :  15);  for  though  many  had 
been  secured  who  bore  false  witness — gave  garbled  testimony — as  to 
what  he  had  said  or  done,  they  could  not  be  made  to  agree  in  the 
testimony  which  they  gave.  Finally,  there  came  two  (so  alone 
Matthew,  26  :  60)  who  stated  that  they  had  heard  him  say  that  he 
would  destroy  this  temple  made  with  hands,  and  in  three  days 
build  another  made  without  hands  (cf.  Jn.  2  :  19;  see  later  use  of  this 
same  charge,  Acts  6  :  14).  But  even  in  this  testimony  the  witnesses 
did  not  agree  to  an  extent  that  enabled  the  Council  to  establish  a 
charge  which  would  make  it  possible  for  them  to  demand  his  death 
at  the  hands  of  the  Governor.  (So  alone  Mark;  while  Luke  makes  no 
reference  at  all  to  witnesses  in  the  trial.)  All  their  resources  in  this 
direction  having  thus  failed;  effort  was  made  to  compel  the  Prisoner 
to  incriminate  himself.  Jesus  had  throughout  the  proceedings  main- 
tained a  silence  that  was  justified  by  the  falseness  of  the  testimony  and 
by  his  consciousness,  not  only  of  the  utter  hopelessness  of  convincing 
these  of  his  right  to  life,  but  of  the  holy  dignity  of  the  position  in 
which  he  stood  before  the  Nation  as  its  Messiah.  Caiaphas  therefore, 
rising  from  his  seat,  demanded  that  the  Prisoner  himself  untangle  the 
confused  charge  of  sacrilege  which  the  last  two  witnesses  had  produced 
and  confess  to  the  guilt  which  they  had  been  unable  to  prove,  but 
which,  because  there  were  two  who  referred  to  it,  seemed  hopefully 
to  lurk  in  the  facts.  But  Jesus  still  held  his  peace.  Laying  aside, 
therefore,  all  these  secondary  charges  by  which  they  had  thought  to 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

65.  they  all  condemned  him  to  be  ^  worthy  of  death.  And 
some  began  to  spit  on  him,  and  to  cover  his  face,  and 
to  buffet  him,  and  to  say  unto  him.  Prophesy :  and  the 
officers  received  him  with  blows  of  their  hands. 

1  liable  to. 

involve  him  with  the  people,  as  well  as  to  arraign  him  against  the 
Law,  the  high  priest  confronted  Jesus  with  a  question  which  summed 
up  the  whole  issue  between  him  and  the  hierarchy — whether  the 
Messiah  was  to  be  the  spiritual  supplanter  of  an  enthroned  ceremo- 
nialism, or  its  representative  religiously  and  politically  before  the 
world.  Art  thou  tiie  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  Blessed?  (a  term  found 
only  here  in  the  New  Testament,  and  one  which  may  well  have  been 
used  by  the  high  priest  to  avoid  the  Holy  Name,  in  which  case 
Matthew  gives  the  term  in  its  Christian  phrasing,  26  :  63).  On  this 
question — just  because  it  raised  the  vital  issue — Jesus  could  not  be 
silent.  He  had  challenged  these  ceremonial  claims  at  the  beginning 
of  his  ministry  (see  notes  on  2  :  7-10);  he  accepts  this  challenge  of 
his  own  claims  here  at  its  close  and  answers,  I  am,  and  adds  to  this  a 
statement  which  leaves  no  doubt  that  his  claims  involve  a  fulfilment 
in  himself  of  the  supreme  prerogatives  of  Messianic  authority  and 
power  (cf.  Ps.  no;  Dan.  7  :  13).  Matthew  represents  this  question 
as  put  to  Jesus  on  oath  (26  :  63).  Luke's  record  of  the  question  and 
its  answer  differs  greatly  from  that  of  Matthew  and  Mark,  and  is 
evidently  not  primary  (22  :  67-70).  Jesus'  calm  acceptance  of  this 
issue  and  his  added  assertion  of  divine  rights — an  assertion  which 
carried  with  it  the  judgment  of  God  upon  their  position — naturally 
aroused  within  Caiaphas  and  the  Council  feelings  of  anger  and 
horror.  To  them  it  was  not  only  defiance  but  blasphemy.  To  this 
the  high  priest  testified  by  the  symbolic  rending  of  his  clothes  (his 
undergarments,  as  prescribed  by  custom,  to  express  great  sorrow, 
Gen.  37  :  29,  34,  or  indignant  protest,  Num.  14  :  6),  and  to  his  ques- 
tion, What  think  ye?  they  answered.  He  is  worthy  of  death.  This 
question  to  the  Council  and  their  reply  is  not  recorded  by  Luke. 

65.  Some — of  the  members  of  the  Council,  now  that  the  Prisoner 
was  by  his  own  confession  an  outcast  of  the  Law,  gave  vent  to  their 
venom  by  heaping  upon  him  the  grossest  of  indignities  and  insults. 
They  began  to  spit  upon  him  (Matthew,  more  specifically  "in  his 
face,"  26  :  67;  cf.  Num.  12  :  14;  Deut.  25  :  9;  Isa.  50  :  6)  and  to 
cover  his  face  (Possibly,  after  the  Roman  custom  of  covering  the 
head  of  condemned  criminals.  Luke  says  "blindfolded  him,"  22  :  64), 
and  then  to  buffet  him  (lit.  strike  with  the  fist)  while  they  mockingly 
called  upon  him  to  prophesy  who  struck  him  (Matthew  gives  full 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

66.  And  as  Peter  was  beneath  in  the  court,  there  cometh 

67.  one  of  the  maids  of  the  high  priest;  and  seeing  Peter 
warming  himself,  she  looked  upon  him  and  saith, 

68.  Thou  also  wast  with  the  Nazarene,  even  Jesus.  But 
he  denied,  saying,  I  neither  know,  nor  understand 
what  thou  sayest:  and  he  went  out  into  the  porch; 

69.  -^  and  the  cock  crew.  And  the  maid  saw  him,  and  be- 
gan again  to  say  to  them  that  stood  by.  This  is  one  of 

1  Many  MSS.  omit  and  the  cock  crew. 

expression  to  their  derision  in  his  "Prophesy  unto  us,  thou  Christ, 
who  is  he  that  struck  thee?"  26  :  68).  Seeing  the  treatment  he 
received  from  the  Council,  the  officers  (members  of  the  Temple 
guard,  who  still  had  him  in  charge,  cf.  Lk.  22  :  52)  received  him — 
doubtless  as  he  was  knocked  against  them  by  the  Sanhedrists — with 
blows  of  their  hands  (Ht.  with  blows  of  rods,  as  in  Jn.  18  :  22;  19  : 3; 
cf .  margms) .  Luke  represents  all  this  outrage  as  perpetuated  by  the 
guards;  but  he  misplaces  it  before  the  trial  took  place_(22  :  63-65). 

So  ended  the  hours  of  this  night  of  horror  and  iniquity.  But  the 
part  in  it  played  by  Peter  is  yet  to  be  told.  Peter's  denials  of  his 
Master,  prepared  for  in  ver.  54,  are  now  recorded  in  detail. 

66-72.  Beneath  in  the  court:  The  Sanhedrists  were  assembled, 
apparently  in  one  of  the  upper  rooms  of  the  palace,  overlooking  the 
court  (cf.  Lk.  22  :  61),  though  unlikely  within  hearing  even  of  such 
vigorous  protestations  as  Peter  made.  One  of  the  maids  of  the 
high  priest — a  young  female  slave  (cf.  Gal.  4:22),  one  of  the  high 
priest's  domestics,  whose  duty  apparently  was  to  attend  at  the 
street  door  of  the  palace  (Jn.  18  :  16;  cf.  Acts  12  :  13).  She  seemed 
first  to  notice  him  as  a  stranger  in  the  group  around  the  fire  and 
then  looking  at  him  more  attentively — in  a  way,  perhaps,  her  duties 
as  portress  had  accustomed  her  to  do — recognized  him  as  one  whom 
possibly  she  had  seen  in  Jesus'  disciple  company  during  these  days  of 
the  Feast  (cf.  Jn.  18  :  17).  I  neither  know  nor  imderstand  what 
thou  sayest  (or,  more  Ukely,  in  his  startled  confusion,  as  in  the  mar- 
gin, ''I  neither  know  nor  understand:  thou,  what  sayest  thou?"). 
His  denials  are  likely  to  have  developed  from  general  to  specific 
negations,  as  he  was  repeatedly  confronted  with  the  facts,  so  that 
such  a  confused  answer  as  this  is  what  might  be  expected  at  first. 
Matthew  presents  the  development  most  clearly  (26  :  70-74);  Luke, 
the  least  so  (22  :  57-60).  Went  out  into  the  porch  (marg.  "fore- 
court."   Matthew,  Ht.,  towards  the  gate,  26  :  71):  He  left  the  light  of 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

70.  them.  But  he  again  denied  it.  And  after  a  little  while 
again  they  that  stood  by  said  to  Peter,  Of  a  truth 

71.  thou  art  one  of  them;  for  thou  art  a  Galilaean.  But 
he  began  to  curse,  and  to  swear,  I  know  not  this  man 

72.  of  whom  ye  speak.  And  straightway  the  second  time 
the  cock  crew.  And  Peter  called  to  mind  the  word, 
how  that  Jesus  said  unto  him.  Before  the  cock  crow 
twice,  thou  shalt  deny  me  thrice.  ^  And  when  he 
thought  thereon,  he  wept. 

^  And  he  began  to  weep. 

the  fire  and  retreated  into  the  passageway  leading  to  the  door  open- 
ing on  the  street.  Began  again  to  say:  Mark  represents  this  as  a 
repeated  statement  by  the  same  maid,  asserting  to  them  that  stood 
by  the  rightfulness  of  her  first  charge;  Matthew  makes  it  another 
maid  (26  :  71);  Luke,  another  person  (22  :  58).  In  any  case,  Peter 
seems  to  have  heard  the  renewed  accusation  and  again  denied  it, 
Matthew  adding  "with  an  oath"  (26  :  72).  Finally,  after  a  little 
while  (Luke,  "after  the  space  of  about  one  hour,"  22  :  59)  Peter 
having  apparently  returned  to  the  fire  and  brazened  out  the  situation 
by  entering  into  conversation  with  the  loungers,  began  to  betray  his 
GaHlean  accent.  This,  as  far  as  we  have  any  knowledge,  was  defec- 
tive in  its  gutturals  and  tended  to  lisping,  and  consequently  in  this 
respect  could  hardly  have  disclosed  itself  in  the  answers  which  he  is 
recorded  by  Mark  as  giving,  but  is  quite  likely  to  have  needed  more 
of  a  conversation  to  make  itself  apparent;  though  there  is  not  to  be 
forgotten  the  general  provincialism  of  tone  and  manner  which  must 
have  been  present  in  all  he  said.  (See  reference  to  local  differences  in 
pronunciation  within  Palestine  in  Jg.  12  :  6.)  On  this  clear  evidence, 
the  charge  is  forcefully  renewed.  Of  a  truth,  thou  art  one  of  them,  to 
which  he  replies  with  his  stoutest  protestation  and  with  a  loss  of  all 
self-control  calls  down  curses  on  himself  in  a  desperate  effort  to  sustain 
his  lie.  Luke  has  no  reference  to  the  profanity  (22  :  60);  while  John, 
evidently  at  this  point  adds  to  the  conclusiveness  of  the  charge  the 
fact  that  a  kinsman  of  the  high  priest's  servant,  whom  Peter  had 
wounded  at  the  arrest,  recognized  him  as  one  whom  he  had  seen  with 
Jesus  in  the  garden  (18  :  26).  Straightway — doubtless,  as  Peter 
finished  (Luke  puts  it,  "Immediately,  while  he  yet  spake,"  22  :  60), 
the  second  time  the  cock  crew:  The  first  time  (ver.  68)  he  may  not 
have  noticed  it;  though  all  the  other  Evangelists  record  but  one 
crowing,  and  at  this  time,  while  the  best  te.xt  of  ver.  68  records  none 

223 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

15.  And  straightway  in  the  morning  the  chief  priests 
with  the  elders  and  scribes,  and  the  whole  council, 
held  a  consultation,  and  bound  Jesus,  and  carried 

here.  In  either  case,  Peter  now  for  the  first  tune  recalls  what  Jesus 
had  said  of  his  forthcoming  denials.  If  the  look  which  the  Master 
gave  the  Apostle,  probably  from  the  upper  room  in  one  of  the  inter- 
vals of  the  trial,  or  after  it  was  over  (recorded  alone  by  Luke,  22  :  61), 
is  part  of  the  incident,  the  consciousness  of  his  perfidy  must  have 
been  miserably  increased  and  under  its  pressure,  he  wept  (Matthew, 
26  :  75,  and  Luke,  22  :  62,  "he  went  out  [of  the  courtl  and  wept 
bitterly"). 

(7)  The  Trial  Before  Pilate^  15  : 1-20 

1.  Straightway  in  the  morning,  i.e.  at  the  first  break  of  day,  so 
that  Jesus  might  be  taken  to  the  Governor  before  the  streets  were 
crowded.  Held  a  consultation:  It  would  seem  that  after  the  so-called 
trial  the  Council  had  adjourned,  reassembling  at  early  dawn  to  con- 
sult as  to  how  they  should  formulate  the  charge  to  be  brought  before 
the  Governor.  The  only  accusation  which  they  had  been  able  to 
work  up  against  the  Prisoner  was  a  strictly  religious  one,  which  a 
Roman  ofl&cial  would  be  quite  likely  to  ignore,  and  all  that  they  had 
accomplished  would  come  to  nought.  Luke  seems  to  have  confused 
this  consultation  with  the  Council  trial  (22  :  66-71).  Delivered  him 
up  to  Pilate:  When  Archelaus,  because  of  his  intolerably  oppressive 
rule,  was,  on  petition  by  the  Jews,  removed  from  his  ethnarchy  over 
Judaea,  Samaria  and  Idumaea,  his  domain  was  placed  in  charge  of  a 
Procurator,  who  was  independent  in  his  administration  save  in  cases 
of  extreme  necessity  or  difficulty,  when  the  Legate  of  Syria  assumed 
command  (cf.  Schiirer,  I,  ii,  p.  44f.).  He  had  thus  in  the  normal 
conduct  of  his  rule  the  right  of  deciding  matters  of  life  and  death 
(cf.  Schiirer,  I,  ii,  p.  57f.;  Jn.  18  :  31).  His  official  residence  was  at 
Caesarea  (cf.  Acts  23  :  23),  where  he  was  assisted  by  a  Council 
(cf.  Schiirer,  I,  ii,  p.  60;  Acts  25  :  12);  but  during  the  Passover  week  it 
was  his  custom  to  be  present  at  Jerusalem  with  a  detachment  of 
soldiers  to  guard  against  possible  outbreaks  of  Jewish  fanaticism 
(cf.  Schiirer,  I,  ii,  p.  48f.;  Matt.  27  :  27).  It  is  uncertain  where  he 
resided  while  in  Jerusalem — whether  in  the  palace  {Prcztoriitm)  of 
Herod  (cf.  Schiirer,  I,  ii,  p.  48f.;  Acts,  23  :35),  a  fortified  structure 
on  the  Western  hill;  or  in  the  Antonia,  the  citadel  adjoining  the 
Temple  (cf.  Westcott,  on  Jn.  18  :  28;  19  :  13;  Swete,  on  Mk.  15  :  16), 
where  the  troops,  always  present  in  the  city,  were  quartered  (cf.  Acts 
21  131).  Pontius  Pilate,  the  fifth  in  the  series,  was  appointed  in 
25-26  A.D.  His  rule,  as  represented  both  by  Josephus  {Antig. 
xviii;  Jewish  War,  ii,  9,  2ff.)  and  by  Philo  {De  Leg.  38),  was  one  of 

224 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

2.  him  away,  and  delivered  him  up  to  Pilate.  And 
Pilate  asked  him,  Art  thou  the  King  of  the  Jews?   And 

3.  he  answering  saith  unto  him,  Thou  say  est.    And  the 

4.  chief  priests  accused  him  of  many  things.  And  Pilate 
again  asked  him,  saying,  Answerest  thou  nothing? 

5.  behold  how  many  things  they  accuse  thee  of.  But 
Jesus  no  more  answered  anything;  insomuch  that 
Pilate  marvelled. 

corruption  and  cruelty  (cf.  Lk.  13  :  i);  although  the  Gospel  record  of 
his  conduct  in  the  case  of  Jesus  shows  him  to  have  been  not  utterly 
destitute  of  the  sense  of  justice,  while  vacillating  in  will  and  domi- 
nated by  a  regard  for  his  own  interests. 

2-5.  Art  thou  the  King  of  the  Jews?:  We  have  here  the  first  inti- 
mation of  the  results  reached  in  the  consultation  of  the  Council. 
Laying  aside  the  religious  character  of  his  confession  of  Messiahship, 
they  had  formulated  it  into  a  claim  of  political  kingship  over  the 
Jews — the  precise  thing  which  in  his  Ministry  he  had  declined  to 
entertain,  and  declining  had  alienated  the  populace  and  embittered 
the  leaders.  Luke,  who  throughout  the  Passion  narrative  is  evidently 
relying  on  other  and  more  detailed  sources  than  Mark,  gives  us  the 
form  in  which  the  charge  was  laid  before  Pilate:  "We  found  this 
man  perverting  our  nation,  and  forbidding  to  give  tribute  to  Caesar 
and  saying  that  he  himself  is  Christ  a  King" — or  as  in  margin — "an 
anointed  King"  (23  :  2)  and  the  penalty  they  demanded:  "worthy  of 
death"  (23  :  15).  The  Fourth  Gospel  phrases  it  in  a  purely  general 
way:  "If  this  man  were  not  an  evil  doer,  we  should  not  have  delivered 
him  up  to  thee"  (18  :  30).  In  addition  to  this  charge  of  political 
kingship,  the  chief  priests,  who  did  not  hesitate  to  lay  aside  the 
dignity  of  their  office  in  personally  appearing  before  the  Roman 
official,  accused  him  of  many  things,  which  probably  refer  to  the 
additional  items  involved  in  the  charge  as  given  by  Luke  (23  :  2,  5). 
To  Pilate's  question  Jesus  replied  Thou  sayest;  for  to  deny  this 
claim,  or  to  ignore  it,  however  falsely  his  accusers  had  emphasized 
it,  would  have  been  to  disown  in  a  significantly  public  way  his  mission 
to  his  people.  But  to  the  detailed  charges  of  the  priests,  utterly 
distorted  and  falsified  as  from  Luke's  record  (23  :  2)  we  see  they 
were,  he  answered  nothing  insomuch  that  Pilate  marvelled.  The 
Fourth  Gospel  elaborates  Jesus'  reply  to  Pilate's  question  into  a 
dialogue  between  the  Prisoner  and  the  official  (18  :  34-38),  but,  with 
Luke,  says  nothing  of  the  refusal  to  answer  the  varied  charges  of  the 
priests.    From  Luke  (23  : 4)  and  John  (18  :  38)  we  learn  that  Pilate 

225 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

6.  Now  at  the  feast  he  used  to  release  unto  them  one 

7.  prisoner,  whom  they  asked  of  him.  And  there  was 
one  called  Barabbas,  lying  bound  with  them  that  had 
made  insurrection,  men  who  in  the  insurrection  had 

8.  committed  murder.  And  the  multitude  went  up  and 
began  to  ask  him  to  do  as  he  was  wont  to  do  unto  them. 

was  not  impressed  with  the  charges,  and  gave  it  as  his  opinion  that 
there  was  no  fault  to  be  found  with  the  Prisoner.  But,  as  Luke  adds 
(23  :  5-16),  the  priests  having  reiterated  their  charges  with  increased 
bitterness  and  having  mentioned  Galilee  as  included  in  the  field  of 
Jesus'  activities,  Pilate  sent  him  with  his  accusers  to  Herod,  who  was 
in  Jerusalem  at  that  time,  and  close  at  hand,  if  Pilate  was  staying  in 
his  palace  (see  notes  on  ver.  i).  Herod,  however,  having  discovered 
nothing  against  him,  Pilate  summoned  the  accusers  before  him  and 
gave  his  judgment  that  the  Prisoner  had  done  nothing  worthy  of 
death;  so  that  he  would  simply  scourge  him  and  let  him  go.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Fourth  Gospel,  the  examination  of  the  Prisoner  apparently 
was  held  within  the  building,  the  judgments  being  given  from  a 
tribunal  set  up,  either  in  the  inner  court  of  the  building,  if  it  was 
Herod's  palace,  or  on  a  cleared  space  without  the  building  if  it  was  the 
Antonia.  The  Fourth  Gospel  refers  to  it  as  "a  place  called  the 
Pavement,  but  in  Hebrew  Gabbatha"  (19  :  13;  cf.  18  :  29,  33,  38; 
19  :4f.,  9). 

6-15.  At  the  feast  (lit.  at  a  feast,  at  feast  time)  he  used  to  re- 
lease .  .  .  one  prisoner:  This  custom,  which  was  confined  to  the 
Passover  (cf.  Jn.  18  :  39)  and  apparently  to  Pilate's  administration 
(cf.  Matt.  27  :  15),  is  of  unknown  origin.  While  it  does  not  seem 
in  accord  with  Pilate's  reputed  harshness  of  rule,  it  may  be  evidence 
of  his  willingness  at  times  to  oJEfset  his  cruelty  with  small  acts  of 
generosity.  He  was  in  bad  enough  favor  with  his  subjects  to  make 
such  a  course  of  action  at  least  good  policy  and  such  concessions  were 
not  contrary  to  the  custom  of  the  Roman  dealings  with  the  Jews  at 
this  time  (cf.  Schiirer,  I,  ii,  pp.  87-89).  Whom  they  asked  of  him: 
The  people  were  apparently  allowed  to  name  the  prisoner  to  be  re- 
leased, the  privilege,  of  course,  being  limited  by  the  nature  of  his 
offence.  Barabbas  (Aram.  Bar- Abba,  'Son  of  the  Father,'  or  *of 
the  Teacher,'  a  patronymic):  From  the  statement  here  given  there 
is  no  reason  to  understand  that  Barabbas  was  a  robber  (as  Jn.  18  :  40), 
or  even  that  he  had  gone  to  the  length  of  murder  (as  Lk.  23  :  19; 
Acts  3  :  14)  in  the  riot  in  which  he  had  participated.  From  ver.  11 
(cf.  Matt.  27  :  16),  he  was  apparently  well  known  and  popular.  In 
accordance  with  this  custom,  the  people  who  had  begun  to  assemble 

226 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


9.  And  Pilate  answered  them,  saying,  Will  ye  that  I 

10.  release  unto  you  the  King  of  the  Jews?    For  he  per- 
ceived that  for  envy  the  chief  priests  had  delivered 

11.  him  up.    But  the  chief  priests  stirred  up  the  multi- 
tude, that  he  should  rather  release  Barabbas  unto 

12.  them.    And  Pilate  again  answered  and  said  unto  them, 
What  then  shall  I  do  unto  him  whom  ye  call  the  King 

before  Pilate's  quarters,  presented  their  petition  that  a  prisoner  be 
released  to  them.     Pilate,  seeing  here  a  way  out  of  his  difficulty, 
asked  them  if  he  should  release  the  king  of  the  Jews,  feeling  sure  that 
the  chief  priests  were  moved  against  the  Prisoner  out  of  envy  of  his 
power  with  the  people  and  believing  that  the  people  would  be  pa- 
triotically aroused  in  favor  of  one  who  had  been  politically  accused 
before  the  Government.     The  Fourth  Gospel  represents  Pilate  as 
himself  reminding  the  populace  of  this  amnesty  custom  and  suggest- 
ing that  it  issue  in  favor  of  Jesus  (18  :sg).     Following  Pilate's  in- 
quiry as  to  whether  in  carrying  out  the  custom  he  should  release 
Jesus,  there  apparently  was  a  period  of  deliberation  on  the  people's 
part,  during  which  the  chief  priests  ("and  the  elders,"  Matt.  27  :  20) 
stirred  them  up  to  ask  that  he  should  rather  release  Barabbas  unto 
them.    The  period,  however,  is  not  likely  to  have  been  long,  for  the 
task  was  not  after  all  a  difficult  one.    Popular  expectation  of  some 
political  announcement  had  been  strong  at  Jesus'  public  entry  into 
the  city;  but  the  enthusiasm  then  manifested  had  not  been  sustained. 
Four  days  had  passed  and  nothing  had  happened.    On  the  day  after 
his  entry  he  had  indeed  dramatically  cleansed  the  Temple,  and  on 
the  following  day  he  had  been  in  keen  controversy  with  the  religious 
leaders;  but  since  then  he  had  practically  retired  from  public  notice, 
and  now  he  stood  before  them  a  helpless  prisoner,  charged  with 
blasphemy  by  the  priests  and  treated  by  Pilate  with  a  pitying  political 
contempt.     There  really  was  not  much  in  his  case  to  arouse  their 
patriotism;   Barabbas,   the   insurrectionist,   appealed   to   them   far 
more,  and,  whether  his  name  was  the  one  they  had  had  first  in  mind 
to_  present,  or  whether  it  was  now  first  suggested  to  them  by  the 
priests,  they  were,  with  no  great  difficulty,  persuaded  to  prefer  it  to 
that  of  Jesus,  and  it  was  so  presented  to  Pilate.     Possibly,  it  was 
during  this  period  of  deliberation  by  the  people  that  Pilate's  wife 
sent  to  him  the  cautionary  message  recorded  by  Matthew  (27  :  19). 
Crucify  him  (Luke  gives  it  as  repeated,  23  :  21):  Their  impassioned 
cry,  as  Pilate  further  questioned  them  what  he  was  then  to  do  with 
Jesus,  was  of  course  in  accordance  with  the  directions  of  the  priests; 

227 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

13.  of  the  Jews?    And  they  cried  out  again,  Crucify  him. 

14.  And  Pilate  said  unto  them,  Why,  what  evil  hath  he 
done?    But  they  cried  out  exceedingly.  Crucify  him. 

15.  And  Pilate,  wishing  to  content  the  multitude,  released 
unto  them  Barabbas,  and  delivered  Jesus,  when  he  had 
scourged  him,  to  be  crucified. 

but  it  doubtless  was  emphasized  by  the  resentment  felt  at  the  Gov- 
ernor's sarcastic  implication— itself  suggested  by  his  surprised  dis- 
appointment at  their  choice — that  Jesus  was  one  whom  they  had 
already  accepted  as  their  king  (cf.  11  :  gf.;  Lk.  19  :  38).  His  ques- 
tion naturally  was  not  intended  to  leave  with  the  mob  the  deter- 
mination of  the  punishment  to  be  given  in  the  case;  it  was  rather 
an  expostulation  with  them  against  giving  over  to  punishment  at 
all  one  who  was  not  guilty  of  any  crime,  so  that  their  wild  answering 
shout,  condemning  Jesus  to  an  ignominious  death,  was  doubtless 
to  Pilate  not  only  an  additional,  but  a  startling  surprise,  and  once 
more  and  with  evident  heat  he  brought  to  them  the  injustice  of  their 
demand.  But  this  seemed  only  to  anger  them  to  reckless  wildness 
and  they  cried  out  exceedingly  (lit.  shouted  with  exceeding  vehemence) 
Crucify  him.  Mark— followed  practically  by  Luke  {t^t,  :_23-25)— 
closes  the  scene  with  the  simple  statement  that  Pilate,  wishing  to 
content  the  multitude,  i.e.  on  a  pure  policy  of  government  expediency, 
released  unto  them  Barabbas,  and  delivered  Jesus  when  he  had 
scourged  him,  to  be  crucified.  Matthew  adds  that  when  Pilate  saw 
that  further  reasoning  with  the  mob  was  useless,  he  washed  his  hands 
before  them,  as  a  public  attestation  of  his  blamelessness  for  the  sen- 
tence and  that  the  people  publicly  accepted  it  as  responsibly  due  to 
them  (27  :  24f.).  The  Fourth  Gospel,  on  the  other  hand,  gives  no 
record  of  this  expostulation,  but  narrates  in  detail  the  closing  of  the 
scene,  which,  as  it  presents  it,  is  determined  solely  on  grounds  of 
Pilate's  personal  interest.  This  narrative  includes  not  only  the 
mockmg  by  the  soldiers— which  appears  in  the  Synoptists  as  an  m- 
cident  following  the  delivering  up  of  the  Prisoner  to  his  fate— but 
also  a  further  fruitless  appeal  of  Pilate  to  the  crowd,  followed  by  an 
ironical  suggestion  that  if  they  insisted  on  a  sentence  of  death,  they 
should  execute  it  themselves— a  thing  legally  impossible,  as  both 
Pilate  and  the  people  knew.  To  this  the  accusers  reply  that  if  the 
Prisoner  be  not  guilty  in  the  Governor's  sight,  he  is  in  theirs,  smce 
he  "made  himself  the  Son  of  God,"  and  their  law  must  be  carried 
out.  This  leads  to  a  further  private  examination  of  the  Prisoner  by 
Pilate,  the  outcome  of  which  is  a  further  effort  on  the  Governor's 
part  to  release  him.    At  this,  the  accusers  make  the  threat  that  such 

228 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

1 6.  And  the  soldiers  led  him  away  within  the  court, 
which  is  the  ^  Prastorium;  and  they  call  together  the 

17.  whole  ^  band.  And  they  clothe  him  with  purple,  and 
iS.  platting  a  crown  of  thorns,  they  put  it  on  him;  and 

19.  they  began  to  salute  him.  Hail,  King  of  the  Jews!  And 
they  smote  his  head  with  a  reed,  and  spat  upon  him, 

20.  and  bowing  their  knees  worshipped  him.  And  when 
they  had  mocked  him,  they  took  off  from  him  the 
purple,  and  put  on  him  his  garments.  And  they  lead 
him  out  to  crucify  him. 

1  palace.  2  cohorL 

action  would  be  a  proper  basis  of  complaint  at  Rome  against  the 
Governor's  loyalty  to  the  Emperor.  Whereupon  Pilate  practically 
gives  up  the  struggle,  bringing  the  Prisoner  out  before  the  people, 
and,  with  a  supreme  contempt  for  them  as  well  as  for  him,  presenting 
him  to  them  as  their  king.  Upon  this,  they  demand  again  his  death 
and  when  Pilate  asks  with  a  sneer  whether  they  will  have  him  crucify 
their  king,  they  reply  with  what  perhaps  was  the  greatest  of  all  the 
lies  to  which  the  situation  had  forced  them,  "We  have  no  king  but 
Caesar."    Thereupon,  Jesus  is  delivered  up  to  death  (19  :  1-16). 

16-20,  Led  him  away  within  the  court:  The  scourging,  which  was 
exceedingly  painful  and  sometimes  followed  by  death,  was  ordinarily 
inflicted  by  lictors,  but,  as  Pilate  had  no  such  ofi&cials,  it  must  have 
been  carried  out  in  this  instance  by  his  soldiers  (cf.  Matt.  27  :  27). 
Apparently,  it  took  place  outside  the  building,  before  the  mob;  since, 
after  it  was  over,  the  soldiers  took  the  Prisoner  into  the  inner  court 
of  what  Mark's  narrative  (cf.  also  Matt.  27  :  27)  regards  as  the 
Praetoriiiin,  or  ofl&cial  residence  of  the  Governor  in  the  city  (cf. 
Jn.  18  :  28,  33;  19  : 9) — whether  this  was  the  palace  of  Herod  (cf. 
Acts  23  :  35),  or  the  Antonia,  where  the  city  troops  were  quartered, 
(cf.  Acts  21  131,  see  notes  on  ver.  i).  There  they  call  together  the 
whole  band — the  cohort,  made  up  of  provincial  troops — excepting 
Jews  who  were  exempt — and  numbering  at  least  500,  which  consti- 
tuted the  city  garrison.  Those  who  had  done  the  scourging  let  it  be 
known  that  the  Prisoner  is  the  reputed  king  of  the  despised  Jews  and 
summon  their  comrades  to  have  sport  with  him.  They  strip  off 
his  outer  garments  (cf.  Matt.  27  :  28)  and  clothe  him  with  purple. 
Matthew  gives  it  more  precisely,  "a  scarlet  robe,"  or  chlamys,  a 
short  cloak  worn  by  soldiers,  ofl5cers,  and  rulers — perhaps  a  cast-off 

229 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

21.  And  they  ^  compel  one  passing  by,  Simon  of  Cyrene, 
coming  from  the  country,  the  father  of  Alexander  and 
Rufus,  to  go  with  them,  that  he  might  bear  his  cross. 

1  impress. 

piece  of  apparel,  with  enough  color  in  it  to  make  it  all  the  more  a 
mockery  (cf.  Swete,  ad  loc).  John  calls  it  simply  "a  purple  gar- 
ment," 19  :  2.  Luke  does  not  record  the  mocking  at  all.  Then  they 
plaited  a  crown  of  thorns — doubtless  from  the  brushwood  kept  in 
the  court  for  the  customary  fire  (cf.  14  :  54;  Jn.  18  :  18,  Menzies, 
ad  loc.) — and  put  it  on  him  and  began  to  salute  (lit.  greet,  acclaim) 
him,  Hail,  King  of  the  Jews !  But  mockery  not  being  enough,  they 
proceeded  to  brutahty  and  smote  his  head  with  a  reed,  which  Mat- 
thew states  they  had  first  placed  in  his  hand  as  a  sceptre  (27  .-29; 
John  says  "they  struck  him  with  their  hands,"  margin  "with 
rods,"  19  :  3),  and  then,  instead  of  the  kiss  of  homage,  they  spat 
upon  him  and  with  supreme  contempt  bowing  their  knees  wor- 
shipped him.  Matthew  connects  this  mock  homage  with  their  royal 
acclaiming  of  him  (27  :  29).  John  makes  no  reference  to  it  at  all, 
and  records  the  whole  incident  as  taking  place  with  the  scourging 
(19  :  if.).  After  their  brutal  scorn  had  satisfied  itself,  the  soldiers 
reclothe  him  with  his  own  garments  and  lead  him  out  to  crucify  him. 

{8)  The  Crucifixion,  15  :  21-41 

21.  Compel  (lit.  to  employ  one  as  a  courier  or  messenger,  a  Persian 
word,  cf.  Deissmann,  Bible  Studies,  p.  86f.  Expositor,  January,  1908, 
p.  54;  cf.  also  Matt.  5  :  41,  where  the  same  word  is  used):  The  Per- 
sian couriers,  stationed  by  relays  at  various  localities,  had  authority 
in  case  of  need  to  commandeer  horses,  vessels,  and  men  for  the  further- 
ing of  the  royal  messages  on  their  way.  Here,  this  passing  stranger 
was  pressed  into  the  service  of  carrying  the  cross — i.e.  the  cross  piece, 
the  upright  being  permanently  fixed  in  the  ground,  in  the  place  of 
the  Prisoner,  who  was  too  weakened  by  the  experiences  of  the  night 
and  the  scourging  just  inflicted  to  bear  (Jn.  19  :  17),  as  sentenced 
criminals  were  compelled  to  do,  the  instruments  of  their  execution. 
Simon  of  Cyrene  .  .  .  father  of  Alexander  and  Rufus:  Cyrene  was 
a  city  of  North  Africa,  in  which  a  colony  of  Jews  had  been  settled 
in  the  time  of  Ptolemy  I.  This  stranger  was  doubtless  in  attendance 
upon  the  Passover  (cf.  Acts  2  :  10;  6:9;  13  :  i)  and  was  coming 
into  the  city  from  the  country — not  the  tilled  fields  or  farms,  as  in 
6  :  36,  but  the  general  region  outside  the  city.  If  the  Rufus  here 
referred  to  is  to  be  identified  with  the  Rufus  saluted  by  Paul  in  Rom. 
16  :  13  (cf.  Sanday  ad  loc),  the  reason  for  Mark's  mention  of  him 

230 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

22.  And  they  bring  him  unto  the  place  Golgotha,  which 

23.  is,   being   interpreted,  The   place  of   a   skull.     And 
they  offered  him  wine  mingled  with  myrrh:  but  he 

24.  received  it  not.    And  they  crucify  him,  and  part  his 
garments  among  them,  casting  lots  upon  them,  what 

25.  each  should  take.     And  it  was  the  third  hour,  and 

in  this  general  way,  as  one  who  would  be  well  known  to  his  readers, 
may  be  found  in  the  fact  that  he  was  writing  his  Gospel  for  Christians 
in  Rome.  Matthew  and  Luke  omit  the  reference  to  the  sons  and  the 
Fourth  Gospel  has  no  record  of  the  incident  at  all.  Luke  introduces 
here  the  somewhat  improbable  statement  of  the  following  crowds 
and  wailing  women  and  Jesus'  remarks  to  the  latter  on  the  way 
{22,  :  27-31). 

22.  Golgotha  (Transliteration  of  the  Aramaic  word,  GulgoUa, 
Jn.  19  :  17,  meaning  a  skull  [d.  Lk.  23  :  33]):  The  place  was  near 
the  city  (Jn.  19  :  20),  and,  doubtless  for  the  sake  of  the  impression 
to  be  made  by  the  execution,  a  place  that  was  easily  in  view  of  the 
passing  public  (ver.  29;  Lk.  23  :35);  in  fact,  prominent  enough  to 
be  visible  from  afar  (ver.  40;  Lk.  23  :  49).  Whether  the  traditional 
site,  within  the  space  covered  by  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  in 
the  N.  W.  quarter  of  the  modern  city,  is  correct  depends  upon  the 
location  of  the  second  North  City  wall  mentioned  by  Josephus  Bell. 
Jud.  V,  iv.  2.  If  this  wall  ran  inside  this  region,  the  site  is  likely  to  be 
correct,  as  it  is  confirmed  by  continuous  tradition  from  the  time  of 
Constantine  (So  Hastings  [single  vol.]  Bible  Diet.,  art.  Golgotha.  See 
also  Sanday,  Sacred  Sites,  pp.  53-55).  If  it  ran  outside  of  it,  then 
there  is  no  place  which  will  commend  itself  as  its  location  (So  Stattdard 
Bible  Diet.,  art.  Jerusalem,  §§  36  and  45). 

23-25.  They  (not  the  soldiers,  but  some  merciful  bystanders) 
offered  him  wine  mingled  with  myrrh  (Matthew  says  "gall,"  27  :  34, 
perhaps  due  to  Ps.  69  :  21) — not  to  deaden  the  sense  of  pain,  for 
this  would  not  be  its  effect,  but  to  increase  the  warming  and  stim- 
ulating effect  of  the  wine.  But  "when  he  had  tasted  it"  (Matt. 
27  :  34),  he  refused  it.  He  would  drain  the  cup  which  the  Father 
had  offered  him  to  the  full.  The  incident  is  omitted  by  both  Luke 
and  the  Fourth  Gospel.  They  crucify  him:  The  generally  followed 
method  of  crucifixion  was  to  lay  the  prisoner  on  the  ground  and 
upon  the  cross  piece,  which  had  been  thrust  under  his  shoulders,  the 
arms  were  then  stretched  out,  and  the  hands  nailed  to  its  extremities 
(Jn.  20  :  25).  So  fastened,  the  body  was  lifted  up  and  the  cross  piece 
nailed  to  the  upright  already  fixed  in  the  ground,  the  body  resting 
on  a  piece  of  wood  attached  to  the  upright  as  on  a  saddle.    The  feet 

231 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

26.  they  crucified  him.    And  the  superscription  of  his  ac- 
cusation was  written  over,  the  King  of  the  Jews. 

also  were  probably  nailed  to  the  upright  (Lk.  24  :  sgt).  So  erected, 
the  cross  stood  not  more  than  nine  feet  high,  the  body  being  within 
easy  reach  from  the  ground  (cf.  ver.  36).  Part  his  garments  among 
them,  casting  lots  upon  them:  This  was  the  customary  disposal  of 
the  victim's  apparel.  The  Fourth  Gospel  has  a  more  detailed  account 
of  how  the  garments  were  divided,  seeing  in  it  a  fulfilment  of  the 
Scripture  in  Ps.22  :  18;  (19  :  23f.).  This  disposal  of  Jesus' garments  he 
follows  with  the  incident  of  the  women  at  the  Cross  and  Jesus'  tender 
committal  of  his  Mother  to  the  care  of  the  disciple  whom  he  loved 
(vs.  25-27).  As,  however,  this  is  the  only  incident  he  records  between 
the  first  and  the  last  moments  of  the  crucifixion,  it  can  only  be  con- 
jectured at  what  time  in  the  interval  it  occurred  (see  below  for  the 
Synoptist's  reference  to  the  presence  of  the  women,  Mk.,  ver.  40; 
Matt.,  ver.  56;  Lk.,  ver.  49).  It  was  the  third  hoiir  (so  alone  Mark) — 
i.e.  9  A.  M.,  according  to  the  Jewish  method  of  reckoning  the  hours 
of  the  day  from  sunrise  to  sunset.  The  Fourth  Gospel  gives  the  time 
at  which  the  sentence  was  finally  passed  upon  the  Prisoner  as  "about 
the  sixth  hour"  (19  :  14),  or  about  6  A.  M.,  if  the  Roman  method  of 
reckoning  from  midnight  to  midnight  is  followed  (see  Edersheim, 
Temple,  p.  174;  but  also  note  the  probability  of  an  error  in  the  text 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  Expository  Times,  Jan.  1909,  p.  iSsf.).  Luke 
here  introduces  the  first  word  from  the  Cross,  which  is  recorded  only 
by  him,  "Father,  forgive  them;  for  they  know  not  what  they  do" 
(23  :  24). 

26.  The  superscription  of  his  accusation:  The  name  of  the  crim- 
inal with  the  crime  for  which  he  had  been  condemned  was  inscribed 
on  a  board,  which  was  carried  before  him,  or  suspended  from  his  neck, 
as  he  went  to  execution  and  afl&xed  to  the  cross  over  his  head  (Matt. 
27  :  37).  The  form  of  the  inscription  given  in  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
"JESUS  OF  NAZARETH,  THE  KING  OF  THE  JEWS,"  (19  :  19), 
as  containing  the  name  and  the  place  is  thus  to  be  preferred  to  the 
shortened  form  given  in  Mark,  THE  KING  OF  THE  JEWS,  followed 
practically  by  Luke  (23  :  38),  and  even  to  that  given  in  Matthew 
which  omits  the  local  designation,  "THIS  IS  JESUS  THE  KING 
OF  THE  JEWS"  (27  :  37).  The  Fourth  Gospel  states  that  the  title 
was  determined  by  Pilate  and  that  "it  was  written  in  Hebrew  and 
in  Latin  and  in  Greek"  (19  :  i9f.) — Latin  being  the  ofiicial  language, 
Greek  the  common  speech,  and  these  being  preceded  by  Hebrew, 
evidently  in  order  that  all  the  Jews,  whether  bilingual  or  not,  might 
smart  in  public  for  what  they  had  compelled  him  to  do.  That  they 
did  smart  is  clear  from  what  the  Fourth  Gospel  adds  of  the  petition 
to  Pilate  by  the  chief  priests  that  the  wording  be  changed  so  that 

232 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

27.  And  with  him  they  crucify  two  robbers;  one  on  his 
right  hand,   and  one  on  his  left.^     And  they   that 

29.  passed  by  railed  on  him,  wagging  their  heads,  and 
saying.  Ha !  thou  that  destroyest  the  ^  temple,  and 

1  Many  IMSS.  insert  ver.  28,  And  the  scripture  was  fulfilled  which  saith,  And  he 
was  reckoned  with  transgressors.  2  sanctuary. 

this  Jewish  kingship  should  not  be  stated  as  a  fact,  but  as  a  claim  on 
the  Prisoner's  part — a  request  which  Pilate  grimly  refused  (19  :  2if.). 

27.  Two  robbers  (Luke,  "malefactors,"  23  :  ss) — outlaws,  brig- 
ands, desperate  characters  and  not  to  be  classed  with  thieves.  At 
the  same  time,  the  word  does  not  designate  them  as  necessarily  in- 
surrectionists and  therefore  of  the  crowd  with  which  Barabbas  had 
been  connected  (ver.  7).  The  Fourth  Gospel  refers  to  the  fact  that 
there  were  two  others  crucified  with  Jesus,  but  makes  no  mention  of 
the  character  of  their  crime  (19  :  18).  Verse  28  is  not  part  of  the 
original  text  and  is,  consequently,  omitted. 

29-32.  They  that  passed  by — not  necessarily  those  of  the  mob 
that  had  demanded  Jesus'  death,  but  persons  passing  to  and  from 
the  city  along  the  pubHc  road,  near  which  the  crosses  had  been  erected. 
They  doubtless  knew  generally  of  Jesus  as  hated  by  the  religious 
leaders  and  had  heard  the  report  of  the  charge  made  against  him  at 
the  Council  trial.  To  them  it  was  a  shamefully  boastful  claim  that 
he  could  destroy  the  sacred  Temple  and  build  it  again  in  three  days— 
a  claim  absurdly  mocked  by  his  present  helpless  condition,  and  their 
fanaticism  burst  forth  in  insulting  cries  and  deriding  gestures;  for 
their  suggestion  that  he  save  himself  and  come  down  from  the  cross 
was  not  so  much  a  challenge  to  his  miraculous  powers  as  a  taunt  at  his 
lack  of  them.  The  chief  priests  mocking  him  among  themselves: 
Although  it  was  a  feast  day  the  priests  and  scribes  and  elders  (Matt. 
27  :  41)  were  out  at  the  place  of  crucifixion,  aside  perhaps  from  the 
passing  crowd  and  refraining  from  directly  railing  at  the  victim,  but 
exulting  among  themselves  at  the  evident  justification  of  their  opposi- 
tion to  his  Messianic  claims.  He  saved  others  from  disease  and  death 
and  held  this  power  as  proof  of  his  Messiahship  (Matt.  11  :  2-6); 
but  now  himself  he  cannot  save  from  this  death  to  which  we  have 
brought  him.  If  he  be  the  Christ,  the  King  of  Israel  he  claimed  to 
be,  let  him  now  come  down  from  the  cross,  that  we  may  see  and  be- 
lieve— not  that  they  would  have  believed  even  if  they  had  seen  him 
come  down  from  his  hopeless  place;  for  the  condition  of  their  belief 
in  Jesus  was  not  the  mere  exhibition  of  miraculous  power — they 
admitted  that  he  had  already  shown  himself  possessed  of  that — but 
of  miraculous  power  applied  to  political  and  revolutionary  ends, 

233 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

30.  buildest  it  in  three  days,  save  thyself,  and  come  down 

31.  from  the  cross.  In  like  manner  also  the  chief  priests 
mocking  him  among  themselves  with  the  scribes  said, 

32.  He  saved  others;  ^  himself  he  cannot  save.  Let  the 
Christ,  the  King  of  Israel,  now  come  down  from  the 
cross,  that  we  may  see  and  believe.  And  they  that 
were  crucified  with  him  reproached  him. 

33.  And  when  the  sixth  hour  was  come,  there  was 
darkness  over  the  whole  ^  land  until  the  ninth  hour. 

1  can  he  not  save  himself?  2  Earth. 

and  even  then  their  belief  would  have  been  only  such  as  would  have 
committed  to  him  the  cause  of  their  religious  nationaUsm.  That 
he  could  not  save  himself  for  such  a  purpose  was  their  unconscious 
testimony  to  the  spiritual  character  of  his  mission  to  the  world. 
Matthew  adds  that  they  quoted  against  him  a  passage  from  the 
22d  Psalm  (27  :43);  while  Luke,  though  he  does  not  mention  the 
public  raillery,  states  that  the  soldiers  joined  with  the  priests  and 
scribes  in  their  derision,  offering  him  vinegar — the  sour  wine  of 
laborers  (Ruth  2  :  14)  and  of  the  common  soldier — in  sport  at  his 
sufferings  (23  :  36).  They  that  were  crucified  with  him  reproached 
him:  With  them  it  was  not  the  sneering  disbelief  of  the  crowd,  nor 
the  jubilant  mockery  of  the  priests,  but  the  bitter  reproach  of  those 
whose  fellow  sufferings  his  helplessness  could  not  relieve.  Luke 
states  that  one  of  the  malefactors  rebuked  his  comrade,  reminding 
him  of  their  own  guilt  as  contrasted  with  Jesus'  innocence,  and 
appealing  to  Jesus  to  be  remembered  when  he  came  into  possession 
of  his  kingdom — an  appeal  to  which  Jesus  replied  with  the  memorable 
words,  "Today  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise"  (23  :  39-43).  The 
Fourth  Gospel  makes  no  reference  to  the  general  incident  of  mocking, 
in  any  of  its  phases. 

33.  Sixth  hour — twelve  o'clock,  noon.  Darkness  over  the  whole 
land:  It  is  not  necessary  to  consider  this  a  supernatural  event.  Nor 
could  it  have  been  an  eclipse  of  the  sun,  with  the  Paschal  moon  at 
its  full,  and  it  is  not  likely  to  have  been  the  darkness  preceding  an 
earthquake,  the  mention  of  which  in  Matthew  (27  :  51-53)  is  due  to 
legendary  influences.  It  may  have  resulted  from  purely  local  causes, 
such  as  the  wind  storms  mentioned  by  Furrer  in  his  Wanderimgen, 
p.  i75f.,  which  in  this  region  occur  at  times  in  the  last  weeks  of 
Spring,  deeply  clouding  the  heavens  till  the  sunlight  finally  disappears. 
At  the  same  time,  it  naturally  impressed  the  disciples,  not  only  as 

234 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


34.  And  at  the  ninth  hour  Jesus  cried  with  a  loud  voice, 
Eloi,  Eloi,  lama  sabachthani?  which  is,  being  inter- 
preted,   My  God,  my  God,  ^  why  hast  thou  forsaken 

35.  me?    And  some  of  them  that  stood  by,  when  they 

36.  heard  it,  said.  Behold,  he  calleth  Elijah.  And  one  ran, 
and  filling  a  sponge  full  of  vinegar,  put  it  on  a  reed, 
and  gave  hun  to  drink,  saying.  Let  be;  let  us  see 

1  Why  didst  thou  forsake  me? 


portentous,  but  as  divinely  connected  with  the  shameful  event  which 
was  taking  place— the  prophecies  of  Joel  (2  :  31)  and  Amos  (8  :  gf.) 
readily  occurring  to  them— while,  for  ourselves,  however  natural  we 
may  consider  its  cause,  we  cannot  but  recognize  an^  agreement  be- 
tween its  character  and  the  awful  event  in  connection  with  which 
it  occurred.     The  whole  land— of  Judaea— until  the  ninth  hour, 

i  e  3  P.  M. 
34-36.  Jesus  cried  .  .  .  Eloi,  Eloi,  lama  sabachthani :  This  is  the 

Aramaic  form  of  the  opening  words  of  the  2 2d  Psalm,  the  Hebrew  form 
of  which  is  partially  preserved  in  the  marginal  readings  to  this  passage 
and  its  parallel  in  Mt.  27  :  46.  It  would  seem  that  in  this  instance  Jesus 
must  have  used  wholly  the  Hebrew  language;  smce  it  was  only  this 
form  of  the  first  two  words  ("Eli,  Eli")  which  would  have  suggested  to 
the  bystanders  that  he  was  calling  upon  Elijah  (ver.  35)  and  he  would 
not  have  mixed  his  speech.  The  agony  which  Jesus  had  expenenced  in 
the  Garden,  as  he  looked  forward  to  the  inevitable  expression  which 
sin  would  give  to  its  hatred  of  the  love  of  God,  wrung  from  his  lips 
this  cry  of  anguish,  as  the  full  realization  of  this  hatred  closed  down 
upon  him.  It  was  not  the  cry  of  despair,  as  though  he  had  become 
conscious  of  the  Father's  withdrawal  of  fellowship  with  him,  for  there 
was  no  such  withdrawal,  but  the  cry  of  faith  expostulating  against 
despair,  as  he  summoned  his  conviction  of  that  fellowship  against 
all  the  perceptible  signs  of  its  withdrawal  (See  Hogg,  Christ  s  Message 
of  the  Kingdom,  p.  i93f.  with  Garvie,  in  the  Expositor,  June,  1907, 
PP  507-527.)  Some  of  them  that  stood  by— not  the  soldiers,  who 
would  not  understand  the  language,  nor  to  whom  the  sounds  would 
have  had  any  scriptural  suggestion— said.  Behold,  he  calleth  Elijah: 
The  helpless  sufiferer's  supposed  calling  upon  the  Prophet,  who  was 
held  to  be  "a  deliverer  in  time  of  trouble"  (cf.  i  Kings  17  :  8-24) 
excites  anew  their  derision,  though  perhaps  with  a  certain  amount 
of  superstitious  interest.  One  of  the  crowd,  doubtless  hearing  Jesus 
cry  of  thirst  (Jn.  19  :  29),  ran,  and  filling  a  sponge  full  of  vinegar— 
the  soldier's  sour  wine  or  posca—irom  a  jar  that  stood  near  (Jn.  19  : 

235 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

37.  whether   Elijah   cometh   to   take   him   down.     And 

^8.  Jesus  uttered  a  loud  voice,  and  gave  up  the  ghost.   And 

the  veil  of  the  ^  temple  was  rent  in  two  from  the  top 

39.  to  the  bottom.    And  when  the  centurion,  who  stood 

1  sanctuary. 

29),  put  it  on  a  reed  ("hyssop,"  Jn.  19  :  29 — a  plant  of  uncertain 
identification.  See  article  in  Standard  Bible  Dictionary)  and  gave  hun 
to  drink.  The  sponge  and  reed  were  frequently  taken  by  the  guard 
to  the  place  of  crucifixion  for  use  in  such  emergencies.  In  the  present 
case,  however,  it  was  a  self  interested  rather  than  a  merciful  act;  for 
as  the  bystander  carried  it  to  the  cross  he  said,  Let  be ;  let  us  see 
whether  Elijah  cometh  to  take  him  down — resenting  an  interference 
with  his  action  from  the  rest  of  the  crowd,  with  the  idea  that  by 
prolonging  the  sufferer's  life  there  would  be  a  chance  to  see  whether 
the  Prophet  would  come  to  his  rescue.  According  to  Matthew  (27  : 
49),  it  is  the  crowd  that  seeks  to  prevent  the  giving  of  the  relieving 
drink,  in  a  more  excited  interest  in  what  might  possibly  happen. 
Luke  makes  no  reference  to  the  incident. 

37.  And  Jesus  uttered  a  loud  voice — similar  to  his  cry  of  desola- 
tion in  its  agony,  but  different  from  it  in  its  cause — and  gave  up  the 
ghost  (lit.  expired.  So  Lk.  23  :  46;  Matthew,  "yielded  up  his  spirit," 
27  :  50) :  Two  utterances  of  Jesus  are  recorded  in  this  final  moment — 
one  by  Luke  who  states  that  this  agonizing  cry  was  followed  by  the 
words  which,  beautiful  in  themselves,  are  also  significant  of  Jesus' 
restored  assurance  of  communion  with  God,  "Father,  into  thy  hand 
I  commend  my  spirit"  (23  :46);  the  other  by  John,  who  records 
that  Jesus,  having  accepted  the  proffered  drink,  gave  expression  to 
what  must  have  been,  not  merely  the  supreme  relief,  but  the  glorious 
triumph  of  his  accomplished  work,  "It  is  finished"  (19  :  30;  see 
Garvie,  Inner  Life,  p.  424f.).  This  was  the  end  of  his  earthly  mis- 
sion; but  with  it  was  ushered  in  the  beginning  of  that  heavenly 
ministry  which  will  continue  until  the  Kingdom  of  God  is  finally 
consummated  in  the  perfecting  of  this  human  world. 

38.  The  veil  of  the  temple  was  rent — the  veil  which  separated 
the  Holy  Place  from  the  Most  Holy  Place,  the  rending  of  which 
was  considered  in  the  thought  of  the  Early  Church  symbolical  of 
the  believer's  freedom  of  access  to  God  through  the  sacrifice  of  Christ 
(cf.  Heb.  ID  :  i9f.;  6  :  18-20).  Luke  places  this  before  the  death, 
in  connection  with  the  darkness  at  the  sixth  hour  (2^  :  45),  Matthew 
follows  Mark  in  assigning  it  to  the  moment  of  his  death,  but  connects 
with  it  the  earthquake  and  the  opening  of  the  graves  which  he  records 
as  happening  at  that  time  (27  :  51-53). 

236 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

by  over  against  him,  saw  that  he  ^  so  gave  up  the  ghost, 

40.  he  said,  Truly  this  man  was  the  Son  of  God.  And  there 
were  also  women  beholding  from  afar:  among  whom 
were  both  Mary  Magdalene,  and  Mary  the  mother  of 

41.  ^  James  the  ^  less  and  of  Joses,  and  Salome;  who, 
when  he  was  in  Galilee,  followed  him,  and  ministered 
unto  him;  and  many  other  women  that  came  up  with 
him  unto  Jerusalem. 

1  Many  MSS.  read  so  cried  out,  and  gave  up  the  ghost. 

2  Jacob.  3  Grk.  the  little. 

39.  The  centurion — in  charge  of  the  soldiers  detailed  to  carry 
out  the  crucifixion.  Stood  over  against  him — facing  the  cross,  in 
watch  over  the  proceedings,  saw  that  he  so  gave  up  the  ghost  (lit. 
expired;  cf.  ver.  37) — so  differently  from  ordinary  victims,  particularly 
in  the  strength  and  conscious  triumph  of  the  last  moments,  which 
would  be  likely  to  impress  a  Roman.  According  to  Matthew,  who 
associates  with  the  centurion  the  soldiers  of  the  guard,  the  impression 
was  made  by  the  earthquake  and  other  portents  and  was  one  of  super- 
stitious fear  (27  :  54).  Luke  confines  the  impression  to  the  centurion, 
but  assigns  its  cause  generally  to  all  that  had  taken  place  (23  :  47). 
This  man  was  the  Son  of  God  (Ht.  a  son  of  God) :  This  phrase,  even 
if  caught  up  from  the  raillery  of  the  mob  and  the  priests  (cf.  Matt. 
27  :  40,  43),  could  not  have  been  meant  in  a  Messianic  sense  as  the 
Messianic  meaning  of  it  by  those  who  used  it  would  not  have  been  in- 
telligible to  him.  It  expressed,  at  the  utmost,  the  conviction  that  the 
Victim  was  really  something  more  than  human,  much  after  the  manner 
of  the  similar  phrase  in  Dan.  3  :  25.  Matthew  follows  Mark  in  the 
phrasing  of  the  expression  (27  :  54);  Luke  generalizes  and  lowers  it 
into  "a  righteous  man,"  but  adds  a  statement  that  remorse  settled 
upon  the  crowds  as  they  left  the  scene  (23  :47f.).  John  does  not 
record  the  incident. 

40,  41.  Women  beholding  afar  off — at  a  safe  distance  from  the 
mocking  crowd,  but  near  enough  to  watch  the  sufferer  in  sympathy 
with  his  agony,  if  not  to  render  relief.  Mary  Magdalene — i.e. 
the  woman  of  Magdala,  a  town  on  the  Western  shore  of  the  Lake 
of  Galilee,  halfway  between  Capernaum  and  Tiberias.  She  is  re- 
ferred to  by  Luke  (8:2;  cf.  addition  to  Mark's  Gospel,  16  : 9)  as 
having  been  cured  of  severe  demonic  possession,  upon  the  nature  of 
which  will  depend  the  traditional  identification  of  her  with  the  sinful 
woman  of  Lk.  7  :  37.     Mary  the  mother  of  James  the  less  and  of 

237 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

42.  And  when  even  was  now  come,  because  it  was  the 

43.  Preparation,  that  is,  the  day  before  the  sabbath,  there 

Joses  (Matthew  omits  "the  less,"  27  :  56;  cf.  Mk.  15  :  47;  16  :  i;  Lk. 
24  :  10):  If  "Clopas"  (Jn.  19  :  25) — but  not  "Cleopas"  (Lk.  24  :  18) — 
is  to  be  taken  as  another  transliteration  of  the  Aramaic  of  "  Alphaeus," 
— which  is  questioned — then  this  Mary  may  have  been  the  wife  of 
Alphseus  and  the  James  here  mentioned  the  second  James  of  the  Apos- 
tolic circle.  Salome:  From  the  parallel  passage  in  Matthew  (27  :  56), 
this  would  appear  to  be  the  name  of  the  wife  of  Zebedee,  and  may  be 
the  name  of  the  sister  of  Mary,  the  mother  of  Jesus,  referred  to  in  Jn. 
19  :  25.  Whether  the  designation  of  this  James  as  "the  less"  refers  to 
age,  stature,  or  importance,  is  not  known.  (On  these  names,  see  articles 
in  Standard  Bible  Dictionary.)  Luke  does  not  give  the  names  of  the 
women,  but  states  that  with  them  were  "all  his  acquaintance,"  which 
possibly,  though  not  probably,  may  include  the  eleven  (23:49). 
John  has  no  record  of  the  fact.  Followed  him  and  ministered  imto 
him:  Mark  makes  no  reference  to  this  fact  in  his  record  of  the  Gali- 
lean ministry,  as  Luke  does  (8  :  1-3),  nor  in  his  record  of  the  jour- 
ney to  Jerusalem,  as  is  incidentally  done  by  Matthew  (20  :  20). 

(p)  The  Burial,  15  :  42-47 

42.  Even — a  general  term,  covering  the  later  part  of  the  after- 
noon until  sunset,  and  from  sunset  until  the  beginning  of  night  (cf. 
Matt.  14  :  15  with  23;  Ex.  12:6,  margin).  As  Jesus  did  not  die  until 
three  o'clock,  and  time  must  be  allowed  for  Joseph's  petition  to  the 
Governor  and  the  ofl&cial  verification  of  death,  as  well  as  for  the 
preparations  after  the  petition  had  been  granted  (vs.  43-46),  the 
taking  down  of  the  body  must  have  occurred  well  on  towards  six 
o'clock.  The  Preparation:  This  began  at  three  o'clock  and  con- 
tinued until  sunset  (cf.  Josephus,  Ant.,  xvi,  6;  2),  though  the  entire 
day  came  to  be  known  as  the  Preparation.  For  the  sake  of  his  Gen- 
tile readers,  Mark  more  nearly  describes  it  as  the  day  before  the 
Sabbath.  Before  Jesus  expired  the  Jews  had  gone  to  Pilate  to  ask 
that  the  death  of  the  victims  might  be  hastened,  so  that  their  bodies 
might  be  taken  away  (Jn.  19  :3i);  for  the  law  did  not  permit  the 
body  of  a  criminal  to  be  left  unburied  over  night  (Deut.  21  :  23), 
and  this  night  would  be  the  beginning  of  a  Sabbath,  and  this  Sab- 
bath was  "a  high  day;"  for  it  was  not  only  the  seventh  day  of  the 
week,  but  the  second  Paschal  Day,  on  which  the  "Wave-sheaf"  was 
offered  to  the  Lord  (cf.  Edersheim,  Jesus,  ii.  613).  This  order  was 
given,  and  the  legs  of  the  two  malefactors  were  broken,  but  Jesus 
was  found  to  be  already  dead  (Jn.  19  :  32f.). 

43-46.  Nevertheless,  the  body  of  Jesus  doubtless  would  have 
shared  with  the  others  the  common  grave  of  the  criminal  had  there 

238 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

came  Joseph  of  Arimathasa,  a  councillor  of  honorable 
estate,  who  also  himself  was  looking  for  the  kingdom 
of  God;  and  he  boldly  went  in  unto  Pilate,  and  asked 
44.  for  the  body  of  Jesus.  And  Pilate  marvelled  if  he 
were  already  dead:  and  calling  unto  him  the  centurion, 
he  asked  him  whether  he  had  been  any  while  dead. 

not  come  a  friend,  Joseph  of  Arimathea  (probably  the  Ramah,  or 
Ramathaim-zophim,  of  the  hill-country  of  Ephraim,  the  birthplace 
of  Samuel  [i  Sam.  i  :  i  with  19],  a  few  miles  north  of  Jerusalem), 
a  councillor  (a  member  of  the  Jerusalem  Sanhedrin),  who,  however, 
had  not  consented  to  the  action  of  the  Council  against  Jesus  (Lk. 
23  :  51),  of  honorable  estate,  i.e.  of  the  better  class  (cf.  Acts  13  :  50; 
17  :  12),  which  doubtless  implied  the  possession  of  wealth  (Matthew 
calls  him  "a  rich  man,"  27  :  57),  who  was  looking  for  the  kingdom 
of  God  (so  Luke  who  also  speaks  of  him  as  "a  good  and  righteous 
man,"  23  :  50),  one  of  the  ''pious,"  like  Simeon  (Lk.  2  :  25),  who 
had  a  confident  hope  in  a  Messianic  coming  which  would  be  a  religious 
blessing  to  the  people  of  God.  This  statement  of  Mark's  might 
possibly  agree  with  John's  record  that  he  was  "a  disciple  of  Jesus, 
but  secretly  for  fear  of  the  Jews"  (19  .-38),  but  certainly  not  with 
the  unqualified  designation  of  him  by  Matthew  as  one  "who  also 
himself  was  Jesus'  disciple"  (27  :  57).  He  doubtless  accepted  with 
satisfaction  Jesus'  announcement  of  the  nearness  of  the  kingdom 
and  hoped  to  see  it  realized  by  him,  though  he  feared  to  commit 
himself  to  Jesus'  following.  But  now  he  went  boldly  (lit.  having 
gathered  courage) — as  was  quite  necessary,  in  view  of  Pilate's  charac- 
teristic behaviour  towards  the  Jews,  but  quite  possible,  in  view  of 
Joseph's  position  and  wealth— and  asked  for  the  body  of  Jesus,  to 
save  it  from  committal  to  the  criminal's  grave.  Pilate's  doubting 
surprise  that  Jesus  was  already  dead  was  due  to  his  knowledge  of 
the  Hngering  torture  which  generally  accompanied  crucifixion,  and 
indicates  that  Joseph  must  have  presented  his  petition  soon  enough 
after  the  Jews'  request  had  been  granted  for  Pilate  to  recognize  that 
death  had  preceded  the  carrying  out  of  his  order  to  hasten  it.  He 
seeks  to  verify  the  fact  implied  in  the  petition  and  summons  the 
centurion  to  whom  he  had  given  the  order,  to  ascertain  from  him 
whether  Jesus  had  been  any  while  (properly  were  already)  dead  when 
he  reached  the  cross  on  his  errand.  Having  ascertained  the  facts, 
he  granted  the  corpse  to  Joseph.  This  incident  of  Pilate's  surprise 
and  official  verification  of  the  death  is  given  alone  by  Mark.  Bought 
a  linen  cloth:  While  purchases  were  not  permitted  on  the  Paschal 
days,  it  is  possible  that  the  necessities  connected  with  death  and 

239 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

45.  And  when  he  learned  it  of  the  centurion,  he  granted 

46.  the  corpse  to  Joseph.  And  he  bought  a  Hnen  cloth, 
and  taking  him  down,  wound  him  in  the  linen  cloth, 
and  laid  him  in  a  tomb  which  had  been  hewn  out  of  a 
rock;  and  he  rolled  a  stone  against  the  door  of  the 

47.  tomb.  And  Mary  Magdalene  and  Mary  the  mother 
of  Joses  beheld  where  he  was  laid. 

burial  overruled  the  law  of  the  feast  (cf.  16  :  i).  The  cloth  must 
have  been  a  piece  of  considerable  size  and,  according  to  Matthew 
(27  :  59),  was  "clean,"  i.e.  fresh  and  unused.  Taking  him  down — 
not  the  body  itself,  as  represented  in  Rubens'  famous  picture,  but 
the  cross  piece  to  which  the  body  was  afiQxed,  which  was  laid  on  the 
ground  and  the  body  removed  from  it.  The  body  was  then  wound 
in  the  cloth,  and  hurriedly  carried  to  a  nearby  tomb  (John  specifies 
that  it  was  in  a  garden  "in  the  place  where  he  was  crucified,"  19: 
41)  .  .  .  hewn  out  of  a  rock.  (According  to  Matthew,  Joseph's  own 
tomb,  which  was  new,  27  :  60;  Lk.  23  :  53,  and  Jn.  J9  :  41,  adding 
that  it  was  one  in  which  no  one  had  yet  been  laid) :  Possibly,  on  ac- 
count of  the  shortness  of  time  at  their  disposal,  this  was  intended 
merely  as  a  temporary  resting  place  for  the  body  until  the  Sabbath 
was  over  (cf.  Jn.  19  :  42).  These  caves  were  furnished  with  a  court, 
eight  or  nine  feet  square,  around  which,  or  in  a  lower  cave  behind 
which,  were  insertions  into  the  rock  at  right  angles  to  the  wall  for 
depositing  the  bodies  (cf.  Edersheim,  Jesus,  ii,  p.  617;  Jewish  Social 
Life,  p.  1 7 if.).  In  this  court,  doubtless,  the  body  was  unwrapped  and, 
as  the  Fourth  Gospel  intimates,  the  cloth  torn  into  strips  ("cloths") 
and  with  intermingled  "spices"  brought  by  Joseph's  fellow-Sande- 
drist,  Nicodemus,  bound  up  again,  "as  the  custom  of  the  Jews  is  to 
bury"  (Jn.  19  :  40,  see  notes  on  14  :  8).  Rolled  a  stone  against  the 
door  of  the  tomb :  This  stone  was  circular  in  form.  It  moved  along  a 
groove  slightly  depressed  at  the  center,  where  it  would  be  held  in 
position  against  the  opening  (cf.  Hastings'  single  vol.  Bible  Dic- 
tionary, art.  Tomb). 

47.  Mary  Magdalene  and  Mary  the  mother  of  Joses:  The  two 
Marys  mentioned  in  ver.  40  as  among  the  women  at  the  Cross  are 
here  referred  to  as  having  evidently  remained  to  witness  the  final 
disposition  made  of  the  body.  From  their  report,  doubtless,  the 
further  service  narrated  in  16  :  i  was  determined  upon  (cf.  Lk.  23  :  56). 
Matthew  here  inserts  his  account  of  the  request  made  by  the  chief 
priests  and  the  Pharisees  that  Pilate  should  seal  the  sepulchre  and 
set  a  guard  of  soldiers  to  watch  over  it  until  the  third  day  (27  :  62-66), 

240 


I 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


16.       And  when  the  sabbath  was  past,  Mary  Magdalene, 
and  Mary  the  mother  of  ^  James,  and  Salome,  bought 

2.  spices,  that  they  might  come  and  anoint  him.    And 
very  early  on  the  first  day  of  the  week,  they  come  to 

3.  the  tomb  when  the  sun  was  risen.    And  they  were  say- 
ing among  themselves.  Who  shall  roll  us  away  the  stone 

4.  from  the  door  of  the  tomb?  and  looking  up,  they  see 
that  the  stone  is  rolled  back:  for  it  was  exceeding  great. 


Jacob. 


giving  later,  at  the  close  of  his  account  of  the  experiences  of  the 
women,  his  statement  of  their  report  to  the  chief  priests  of  what  had 
happened  and  the  bribery  of  the  soldiers  to  silence  by  the  chief 
priests  and  elders  (28  :  11-15)- 

{10)  The  Visit  of  the  Women  to  the  Tomb,  16  :  i-S 
16  : 1.  When  the  Sabbath  was  past— /.e.  after  sunset— Mary 
Magdalene  and  Mary  the  Mother  of  James  and  Salome :  see  note 
on  15  :47.  Luke  substitutes  "Joanna"  for  Salome  and  adds  "the 
other  women  with  them"  (24  :  10;  cf.  8  :  3).  Matthew  restricts  the 
group  to  "Mary  Magdalene  and  the  other  Mary"  (28  :  i);  while 
John  gives  only  "Mary  Magdalene"  (20  :  i).  Bought  spices  (ht. 
aromatics):  Luke  adds  "ointments"  (23  :  56)  and  states  that  they 
were  prepared  by  the  women  on  their  return  from  witnessing  the 
burial,  which,  however,  is  unlikely,  if  intended  to  be  taken  strictly  as 
applying  to  the  afternoon  of  Friday;  since  it  was  too  near  the  sunset 
which  ushered  in  the  Sabbath  to  allow  for  a  return  to  the  city  and  a 
purchase  and  preparation  of  the  material  before  the  beginnmg  of  the 
sacred  day.  Anoint  him— not  in  the  way  of  embalming,  which  was 
an  Egyptian  custom  and  not  practised  by  the  Jews  (see  notes  on 
14  :  8),  but  an  external  application,  supplementing  the  hasty  work  of 
Joseph  and  Nicodemus  on  Friday  afternoon. 

2-4.  Very  early  .  .  .  when  the  sun  was  risen:  Luke  says  "at 
early  dawn"  (24  :  i);  John,  "while  it  was  yet  dark"  (20  :  i);  Matthew, 
"late  on  the  Sabbath  day  (lit.  late  from  the  Sabbath  day;  cf.  Moulton 
Gram.  N.  T.  Greek,  p.  72f.),  as  it  began  to  dawn  toward  the  first  day 
of  the  week."  (Cf.  Burkitt,  in  Journal  of  Theological  Studies,  July, 
I9i3»  PP-  538-546.)  These  variant  statements,  confusing  though 
they  are,  make  certain  that  the  time  was  in  the  early  hours  of  the 
morning  (cf.  Andrews,  Life  of  our  Lord,  p.  598f.).  Who  shall  roll  us 
away  the  stone? :  Apparently,  they  have  no  knowledge  of  the  guard  at 

241 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

5.  And  entering  into  the  tomb,  they  saw  a  young  man 
sitting  on  the  right  side,  arrayed  in  a  white  robe; 

6.  and  they  were  amazed.  And  he  saith  unto  them, 
Be  not  amazed:  ye  seek  Jesus,  the  Nazarene,  who 
hath  been  crucified:  he  is  risen;  he  is  not  here:  behold, 

7.  the  place  where  they  laid  him!  But  go,  tell  his  dis- 
ciples and  Peter,  He  goeth  before  you  into  Galilee: 

the  tomb  (cf.  Matt.  27  :  62-66).  Their  anxiety  was  confined  to  the 
removal  of  the  stone,  which  would  need  more  than  their  combined 
strength  (cf.  ver.  4).  But  as  they  approached  the  tomb,  they  looked 
up  and  saw  that  the  stone  had  been  rolled  back,  in  spite  of  the  fact 
that  it  was  exceeding  great.  Matthew  accounts  for  this  by  an  earth- 
quake and  angelic  forces  (28  :  2). 

5-7.  Entering  into  the  tomb,  i.e.  its  antechamber,  or  court  (see 
note  on  15  :  53).  John  has  no  intimation  of  this  nearer  investigation 
(20  :  if.).  A  young  man  sitting  on  the  right  side,  i.e.  of  the  court — 
not  of  the  space  in  the  wall  in  which  the  body  had  been  laid;  since 
these  were  not  niches  parallel  to  the  wall  but  insertions  into  the  wall  at 
right  angles  to  it.  (See  note  on  15  :  S3-)  The  "right  side"  is  in- 
tended as  the  place  of  honor.  Arrayed  in  a  white  robe  and  therefore 
a  heavenly  being  (cf.  Rev.  3  :  4^.;  7  :  13,  etc.).  Matthew  definitely 
describes  the  person  as  an  angel  "whose  appearance  was  as  lightning 
and  his  raiment  white  as  snow,"  and  says  he  was  seated  on  the  stone 
outside  the  tomb  (28  :  2f.);  Luke  mentions  "two  men  .  .  .  in 
dazzUng  apparel,"  who  appeared  to  the  women,  not  upon  their  enter- 
ing the  tomb,  but  afterwards  as  they  stood  perplexed  at  not  finding 
the  body  of  Jesus  (24  :  4).  John  makes  no  mention  of  angelic  appear- 
ances. Amazed  (lit.  utterly  amazed) :  Luke  says  "aflfrighted"  (24  :  5). 
The  angel  removes  their  perplexity  by  the  to  them  astounding  an- 
nouncement that  their  Master  was  risen  from  the  dead,  showing  them 
by  way  of  proof  the  empty  place  where  the  body  had  lain,  and  bids 
them  tell  the  disciples  and  particularly  Peter  that  he  had  gone  before 
them  into  Galilee,  where  they  shall  see  him,  as  he  had  said  (cf. 
14  :  28).  The  singling  out  of  Peter  was  either  in  recognition  of  his 
leadership  among  the  Eleven  or  in  assurance  of  the  Master's  forgive- 
ness of  his  denials  of  him.  Possibly,  both  ideas  entered  into  it.  The 
reminder  of  his  words  spoken  on  the  night  of  his  betrayal  was  needed  in 
view  of  the  confused  excitement  into  which  they  would  be  thrown  by 
the  astounding  announcement  of  his  Resurrection.  All  account  of  this 
Galilean  meeting,  however,  is  lacking  in  this  Gospel;  though  it  may 
have  been  given  in  the  original  ending  of  the  narrative  which  is  lost. 

242 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

8.  there  shall  ye  see  him,  as  he  said  unto  you.  And  they 
went  out,  and  fled  from  the  tomb;  for  trembling  and 
astonishment  had  come  upon  them:  and  they  said 
nothing  to  any  one;  for  they  were  afraid. 

Later  Ending  of  the  Gospel 

The  following  twelve  verses  are  not  a  part  of  the  original  text — 
having  been  substituted  for  the  lost  ending  of  the  narrative  by  a 
later  hand.  There  is  also  a  shorter  ending,  equally  second-hand. 
They  are  obviously  an  effort  to  supplement  from  the  other  Gospels 
the  uncompleted  record  of  the  post-resurrection  events  by  giving  an 
account  of  the  appearances  to  the  women  and  the  disciples,  closing 
with  a  summary  statement  of  the  Ascension  and  the  after  activities  of 
the  Apostolic  band  (see  Introduction,  VII). 

9.  Now  when  he  was  risen  early  on  the  first  day  of 
the  week,  he  appeared  first  to  Mary  Magdalene,  from 

10.  whom  he  had  cast  out  seven  demons.    She  went  and 
told  them  that  had  been  with  him,  as  they  mourned 

11.  and  wept.    And  they,  when  they  heard  that  he  was 
alive,  and  had  been  seen  of  her,  disbelieved. 

Matthew's  account  of  the  angel's  words  (28  :  5-7)  agrees  substantially 
with  Mark's;  Luke's  is  much  expanded,  including  a  reminder  of  the 
prediction  made  specifically  to  the  Twelve  (24  :  5-7). 

8.  However  the  angel's  message  had  relieved  the  perplexity  of  the 
women  at  not  finding  the  Master's  body,  its  amazing  statement  that 
the  Master  had  returned  to  life,  added  to  their  sight  of  this  angelic 
appearance,  produced  in  them  feelings  which  were  as  fearsome  as 
later,  when  they  had  recovered  from  the  shock,  they  were  full  of 
astonished  joy  and  they  literally  fled  from  the  tomb,  confused  in 
thought  and  paralyzed  in  speech.  Luke  makes  no  reference  to  these 
feelings,  though  Matthew  substantially  reproduces  it,  adding,  how- 
ever, the  following  element  of  joy  which  entered  their  hearts  (28  :  8). 

9-1 1 .  Appeared  first  to  Mary  Magdalene :  This  is  strikingly  out  of 
continuity  with  the  preceding  narrative,  from  which  we  would  expect 
an  account  of  how  the  women  brought  the  message  to  the  disciples. 
Instead,  we  have,  with  all  the  marks  of  a  fragmentary  interpolation, 
an  account  of  what  happened  after  the  news  was  brought  to  the 
disciples  and  two  of  them  had  gone  to  the  tomb  to  verify  it.    It  is 

243 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

12.  And  after  these  things  he  was  manifested  in  another 
form  unto  two  of  them,  as  they  walked,  on  their  way 

13.  into  the  country.  And  they  went  away  and  told  it 
unto  the  rest:  neither  believed  they  them. 

14.  And  afterward  he  was  manifested  unto  the  eleven 
themselves  as  they  sat  at  meat;  and  he  upbraided 
them  with  their  unbelief  and  hardness  of  heart,  be- 
cause they  believed  not  them  that  had  seen  him  after 

evidently  gathered  from  Jn.  20  : 1 1-18  and  Lk.  24  : 8-1 1 .  From  whom 
he  had  cast  out  seven  demons — mentioned  by  Luke  in  his  summary 
statement  of  the  second  preaching  tour  (8  :  1-3). 

12-13.  Ill  another  form:  The  reference  here  is  doubtless  to  the 
fact  that  to  Mary  he  seemed  to  be  the  gardener  (Jn.  20  :  15),  while 
to  the  two  disciples  on  the  way  to  Emmaus,  from  whose  experience 
(Lk.  24  :  35)  the  statement  of  this  second  appearance  is  taken,  he 
seemed  to  be  a  stranger  pilgrim  at  the  Feast  (Lk.  24  :  16-18).  It  was 
the  impression  created  rather  than  the  form  itself  which  was  differ- 
ent. Two  of  them — referring  back  to  the  phrase  of  ver.  10 — "them 
that  were  with  him" — which  is  intended  to  indicate  the  general 
discipleship  rather  than  the  Eleven,  Neither  believed  they  them: 
This  added  statement  is  apparently  inferred  by  the  writer  from  such 
statements  as  are  made  in  Matt.  28  :  i6f.,  Jn.  20  :  24-29.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  they  are  not  consistent  with  the  Lukan  record  (24  :  33-35). 

14-18.  Afterward:  The  writer  gives  no  definite  statement  of 
time,  though,  from  the  Lukan  record,  this  appearance  occurred  the 
same  evening  as  the  preceding  appearance  (24  :35f.).  As  they  sat 
at  meat — evidently,  an  inference  by  the  writer  from  the  statement  of 
Lk.  24  :  41-43.  Upbraided  them  with  their  unbelief  and  hardness 
of  heart:  There  is  nothing  in  any  of  the  Gospels'  record  of  the  Master's 
appearances  to  the  Eleven,  not  even  including  the  incident  of  Thomas 
(Matt.  28  :  16-20;  Lk.  24  :  13-43;  Jn.  20  :  1-2 1  :  24),  which  justifies 
this  severity  of  rebuke  or  the  reason  for  it  which  follows.  It  may  have 
taken  its  color  from  Lk.  24  125,  or  more  probably  from  the  tendency 
in  the  later  Apostolic  age  to  look  with  amazement  upon  all  evidences 
of  unreceptivity  towards  the  revelation  of  God  in  Christ  (see  note  on 
4:12).  It  is  not  probable  that  with  such  a  rebuke  on  his  lips  the 
Master  would  proceed  to  commission  the  disciples  to  go  into  all  the 
world  and  preach  the  Gospel  to  the  whole  creation.  This  commission 
is  here  connected  in  time  with  this  appearance,  but  in  actual  fact  it 
was  given  in  Galilee  more  than  a  week  after  this  appearance  to  the 
disciples  in  Jerusalem  (cf.  Jn.  20  :  26;  21  :  i  with  Matt.  28  :  16-20). 

244 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

15.  he  was  risen.  And  he  said  unto  them,  Go  ye  into 
all  the  world,  and  preach  the  gospel  to  the  whole 

16.  creation.  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be 
saved;  but  he  that  disbelieveth  shall  be  condemned. 

17.  And  these  signs  shall  accompany  them  that  believe: 
in  my  name  shall  they  cast  out  demons;  they  shall 

18.  speak  with  ^  new  tongues;  they  shall  take  up  serpents, 
and  if  they  drink  any  deadly  thing,  it  shall  in  no  wise 
hurt  them;  they  shall  lay  hands  on  the  sick,  and  they 
shall  recover. 

19.  So  then  the  Lord  Jesus,  after  he  had  spoken  unto 
them,  was  received  up  into  heaven,  and  sat  down  at 

1  Some  MSS.  omit  new. 

The  writer  is  misled  to  this  connection  doubtless  by  the  words  of  the 
Master  to  the  disciples  at  the  Jerusalem  gathering,  as  recorded  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel  (20  :  21-23),  which  however  do  not  represent  the 
same  charge.  The  range  of  the  Commission  is  substantially  the  same 
as  that  given  in  Matt.  28  :  19;  since  the  Matthew  phrase,  "all  the 
nations,"  cannot  be  restricted  to  the  Gentile  peoples,  exclusive  of 
the  Jews.  But  the  content  of  the  commission  is  significantly  differ- 
ent. With  our  writer,  baptism,  along  with  faith,  is  given  as  a  condi- 
tion of  salvation.  In  Matthew  (28  :  igi.)  baptism  is  an  expression 
of  their  discipleship;  while  the  signs  which  were  to  accompany  them 
that  believe,  as  evidence  of  their  authoritative  mission,  not  as  testi- 
mony to  the  reality  of  their  faith,  are  wholly  foreign  to  the  Matthew 
record.  They  are  introduced  from  the  experience  of  the  Apostolic 
age;  though  the  casting  out  of  demons  and  the  healing  of  the  sick  have 
also  behind  them  the  Master's  commission  to  the  Twelve  on  their 
final  Galilean  preaching  tour  (Matt.  10  :  8;  cf.  also  Mk.  6  :  7,  13; 
Lk.  10  : 9,  17).  Also  the  immunity  from  serpents  seems  to  have 
belonged  to  assurances  given  to  the  disciples  at  some  later  time  in  his 
ministry  (cf.  Lk.  10  :  19.    See  notes  on  6  :  7-13). 

19,  20.  After  he  had  spoken  to  them:  In  giving  the  impression 
that  the  Ascension  occurred  on  the  evening  after  the  Resurrection, 
the  writer  may  be  following  the  narrative  in  Luke,  where  there  is  no 
statement  of  the  interval  of  time  between  the  first  appearance  to  the 
Eleven  in  Jerusalem  and  the  final  meeting  with  them  "over  against 
Bethany"  (24  :  49f.)>  which  is  specifically  indicated  in  the  opening 

24s 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

20.  the  right  hand  of  God.     And  they  went  forth,  and 
preached  everywhere,  the  Lord  working  with  them, 

verses  of  Acts  (i  :  1-5).  On  the  other  hand,  when  we  consider  the 
general  statements  of  sequence  in  vs.  12  and  14,  he  may  not  have 
intended  anything  more  here  than  that  it  occurred  after  Jesus'  inter- 
views with  the  disciples,  a  summary  or  sample  of  which  had  been 
given  in  vs.  15-18.  Sat  down  at  the  right  hand  of  God:  While  this 
expression  has  behind  it  the  citation  from  the  iioth  Psalm  made  by 
Jesus  in  his  teaching  on  Tuesday  of  Holy  Week  (12  :  36),  as  also  his 
statement  in  answer  to  the  High  Priest's  question  at  the  Sanhedrin 
trial  (14  :  6if.),  it  is  rather  an  expression  of  the  faith  of  the  Apostohc 
age  than  a  narration  of  the  event  of  the  Ascension  (cf.  Lk.  24  :  51 
[See  the  bracketing  of  the  phrase  "and  was  carried  up  into  heaven" 
in  the  Greek  text];  Acts  i  :  gf.).  The  closing  verse  is  a  brief  summary 
of  the  activities  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  colored  by  its  experiences  of  the 
divine  confirmation  of  its  message  (cf.  Heb.  2  :  3f.;  Rom.  15  :  i8f.; 
Acts  8  :4-7;  19  :  lof.). 

It  is  quite  impossible  to  construct  a  harmonistic  narrative  of  the 
post-Resurrection  events  which  will  include  all  the  items  of  the  in- 
dependent accounts  as  given  us  in  the  four  Gospels.  It  can  be  said, 
however,  that  it  is  not  likely  that  there  was  a  visit  by  Mary  Mag- 
dalene and  the  other  Mary  to  view  the  sepulchre  (Matt.  28  :  i)  before 
the  visit  of  the  women  who  brought  the  spices  for  the  anointing;  or 
that,  when  the  women  with  the  spices  came,  Mary  Magdalene  went 
ahead  of  them  and,  seeing  the  empty  tomb,  returned  at  once  to  tell 
Peter  and  John  (Jn.  20  :  i) ;  or  that,  following  the  first  group  of  women 
who  had  a  vision  of  a  single  angel,  there  came  another  group  who  had 
a  vision  of  two  angels  (Lk.  24  :  4,  10).  It  is  most  probable  that  these 
diflfering  statements  are  simply  natural  variants  of  independent, 
fragmentary  accounts  of  a  single  visit  by  the  women,  early  in  the 
morning,  for  the  purpose  of  completing  the  hasty  burial  preparation 
of  the  body  on  Friday  afternoon.  They  may  have  become  divided  into 
groups  as  they  proceeded  on  their  way,  so  that  the  two  Marys  reached 
the  tomb  first  (Matt.  28  :  i),  while,  when  they  returned  to  the  city, 
Mary  Magdalene  may  have  hastened  from  the  tomb,  not  only  before 
the  others,  but  before  they  had  received  the  angel  message  of  the 
Resurrection;  so  that  the  word  she  brought  to  Peter  and  John  was 
simply  the  distressing  fact  that  the  sepulchre  was  empty  (Jn.  20  :  2); 
but  the  narratives  give  us,  generally  speaking,  the  record  of  one  visit 
of  the  women  to  the  tomb,  with  one  purpose  in  view.  To  them,  re- 
turning to  the  city,  the  Master  may  have  appeared,  as  stated  in 
Matt.  28  :  gf. 

On  those  two  disciples*  becoming  acquainted  with  the  startling 
facts,  it  is  perfectly  natural  that  they  should  have  proceeded  ?yt  once 

246 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

and  confirming  the  word  by  the  signs  that  followed. 
Amen. 

to  the  sepulchre  to  verify  them,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that, 
reaching  the  place  and  finding  it  empty  as  they  had  been  told,  it 
was  John  alone  who  rose  to  even  a  dawning  faith  as  to  what  might 
be  behind  the  facts  (Jn.  20  :  3-10;  cf.  Lk.  24  :  12).  Mary  Magdalene 
quite  likely  may  have  returned  to  the  sepulchre,  if  not  in  company 
with,  at  least  at  the  same  time  as  Peter  and  John,  and  to  her,  either 
remaining  or  arriving  after  they  left,  the  Master  may  have  appeared, 
as  stated  in  Jn.  20  :  14-18  (cf.  Mk.  16  :  9).  It  is  possible  that  she 
may  have  had  another  vision  of  angels,  as  recorded  in  Jn.  20  :  11-13; 
although  it  is  more  likely  that  the  angelic  messengers,  having  accom- 
plished their  mission  of  acquainting  the  followers  of  Jesus  with  the 
fact  of  the  Resurrection,  departed,  and  that  this  account  in  the  Fourth 
Gospel  is  a  confusion  of  that  given  in  the  Synoptics  (Mk.  16  :  5-7; 
Matt.  28  :  2-7;  Lk.  24  : 4-7).  The  appearances  to  the  two  disciples 
on  the  way  to  Emmaus  (Lk.  24  :  i3ff.;  cf.  Mk.  16  :  12),  to  Peter 
(Lk.  24  :  34;  cf.  I  Cor.  15  15),  and  to  the  Eleven  (Lk.  24  :36ff.; 
Jn.  20  :  igfif.;  cf.  Mk.  16  :  14)  follow  naturally  in  the  region  of  Jeru- 
salem; while  the  appearances  in  Galilee  (Jn.  21  :  1-23;  Matt.  28  :  i6f. 
cf.  I  Cor.  15  :  6f.)  would  naturally  seem  to  be  later.  The  appearance 
to  the  500  mentioned  by  Paul  (i  Cor.  15:6)  was  probably  identical 
with  that  recorded  by  Matthew  (28:  i6f.)  and  followed  directly 
upon  the  meeting  at  the  Lake,  narrated  by  John  (21  :  1-23);  the 
appearance  to  James  (i  Cor.  15  :  7)  may  fittingly  have  been  the  last 
before  the  Ascension — that  to  "all  the  apostles,"  which  is  added  by 
Paul,  being  possibly  the  final  appearance  at  the  time  of  the  Ascension. 
Whether  the  commission  was  given  in  connection  with  the  appearance 
to  the  Eleven  in  Jerusalem,  as  seems  to  be  implied  by  Luke  (24  :  46- 
48) — or  later,  when  he  appeared  to  the  disciples  in  Galilee,  as  in- 
dicated by  Matthew  (28  :  18-20) — or  at  the  last,  before  he  was  re- 
ceived up  into  heaven,  which  is  also  possible  of  inference  from  the 
Lukan  account  (24  :  46-51  cf.  Mk.  16  :  15-19),  may  be  difficult  to 
determine.  It  would  seem  most  natural  that  it  would  be  reserved 
for  the  last,  Luke,  in  his  desire  to  take  up  the  narrative  of  his  Second 
Book,  compressing  unnaturally  the  closing  narrative  of  his  Gospel 
story  (cf.  Plummer,  Commentary  on  Luke,  p.  561;  and  for  a  general 
discussion  of  the  difficulties  of  the  narratives  of  the  Post- Resurrection 
period,  Plummer's  Commentary  on  Matthew,  28  :  1-20;  Latham,  The 
Risen  Master;  Swete,  The  Appearances  of  Our  Lord  after  the  Passion). 


247 


INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  AND   SUBJECTS 


Abiathar,  9. 
Abimelech,  9. 
Adversary,  42. 
Ahaz,  144. 
Alabastron,  201. 
Alexander,  11. 
Alphaeus,  238. 
Altar  of  Zeus,  193. 
Andrews,  241. 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  193. 
Antipas,  96. 
Antonia,  224,  226,  229. 
Apocalyptic  ideas,  9,  14. 
Archelaus,  224. 
Aristion,  28. 
Aristobulus,  96,  97. 
Armenian  MS.,  28. 

B 

Bacon,  10,  15. 

Baptist,  44. 

Bar- Abba,  226. 

Bar- Jonah,  44. 

Barnabas,  6,  9,  27,  68. 

Beelzebul,  69. 

Bethsaida,  44,  100,  118. 

Boanerges,  10,  24. 

Burkitt,  8,  9,  10,  11,  13,  15,  18,  25,  241. 

Burton,  7,  21,  22. 

Buxtorf,  149. 

C 
Caesarea,  124. 
Caiaphas,  200. 
Caligula,  193. 
Canaanites,  113. 

Capernaum,  44,  50,  52,  57,  58,  69,  72, 
86,  100,  14s,  209. 


Cannel,  40. 
Celibacy,  148. 
Cephas,  44. 
Ceremonialism,  107 
Chalcis,  97. 
Cleopas,  238. 
Clopas,  238. 
Colson,  7. 
Conybeare,  28. 
Cyprus,  230. 
Cyrene,  230. 

D 

Dalman,  161,  162. 
Dalmanutha,  10. 
David,  184. 
Day  of  the  Lord,  195. 
Decalogue,  151,  152. 
Deissmann,  230. 
Demon,  83. 
Denarius,  loi,  186. 
Denney,  25. 
Didymus,  68. 
Dioscuri,  68. 
Domitian,  157. 


Edersheim,   loi,   107,    108,   167,    185, 

199,  205,  216,  232,  238,  240. 
Elephantiasis,  51. 
Elijah,  39. 

Embalming,  203,  241 
Ephraim,  145. 
Epilepsy,  136. 
Esdraelon,  40. 
Eucharist,  9. 
Eusebius,  7,  22,  23,  27. 
Exorcism,  83. 


249 


INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  AND  SUBJECTS 


Freer,  26,  28. 
Furrer,  234. 

G 

Gabbatha,  226. 

Gadara,  82. 

Galen,  48. 

Galilee,  44. 

Garvie,  87,  126,  133.  235,  236. 

Genessaret,  45. 

Gersa,  82. 

Gethsemane,  89. 

Gould,  156. 

Gulgolta,  231. 

Guthe,  103. 

H 

Hallel,  211. 

Harris,  68. 

Hatch,  37. 

Hawkins,  21. 

Hebrew,  232,  235. 

Hellenism,  65. 

Hermas,  27. 

Hermon,  130. 

Herod,  11,  45,  58,  65,  93,  95,  96, 

187. 
Herodians,  175,  177. 
Hillel,  146. 
Hinnom,  143,  144. 
Hogg,  79,  87,  138,  159,  177,  198, 

235. 
Homer,  114. 
Hyrcanus,  96. 

I 
Irenseus,  27. 
Ituraga,  96. 

J 

Jacob,  44. 
James,  44,  238. 
Jerome,  27. 
Jerusalem,  193. 
Jewish  War,  9. 
Joanna,  44,  241. 
Johannan,  44. 


160, 


208, 


John,  44,  171. 

Jonah,  44. 

Jonas,  44. 

Josephus,  45,  97,  124,  187,  224,  231, 

238. 
Josiah,  144. 
Judaea,  44, 
Justin  Martyr,  27. 


Kapharnaum,  45, 
Kepha,  67. 
Kerioth,  68. 
Kersa,  82. 
Khan  Minyeh,  45. 


Last  Supper,  9. 
Latham,  247. 
Lazarus,  116,  201. 
Legate  of  Syria,  224. 
Leprosy,  51. 
Lightfoot,  208. 
Locusts,  39. 
Logia,  22, 

M 

Machaerus,  96,  98. 

Magadan,  118. 

Magdala,  82,  118,  237. 

Malchus,  216. 

Mariamme,  96. 

Mary,  238. 

Menzies,  8,  11,  25,  171,  178,  230 

Messiahship,  14,  125. 

Messianic  Spirit,  42. 

Milman,  187,  189. 

Mishna,  107. 

Moffat,  9,  12,  28,  107. 

Moulton,  241. 

N 
Nardostachys  Jatamansi,  201 

en-Nasira,  40. 
Nazareth,  45. 


250 


INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  AND  SUBJECTS 


o 

Old  Testament  Quotations,  3 


Pan,  124. 

Paneas,  124. 

Papias,  7,  9,  22,  23,  28. 

Paschal  Day,  238. 

Passion  chronology,  206. 

Passover,  9,  61,  102,  200,  204,  206. 

Patmos,  157. 

Pavement,  226. 

Pentateuch,  179. 

Pentecost,  61. 

Perean  chapters,  19. 

Peter,  6,  7,  9,  10,  11,  44. 

Pharaoh,  76. 

Pharisees,  65,  147,  175,  177 

Phasaelis,  160. 

Philip,  96. 

Philo,  224. 

Phoenicians,  113. 

Phylacteries,  180. 

Pilate,  224,  238. 

Plato,  7. 

Plummer,  164,  247. 

Possession,  84. 

Prastorium,  224. 

Procurator,  224. 

Prophets,  179. 

Ptolemy,  201,  230. 

Purification  rites,  39. 

R 

Ramah,  239. 

Ramathaim-Zophim,  239. 
Rome,  3,  10. 
Rufus,  3,  II. 

S 
Sadducees,  65,  96,  147,  177. 
Salome,  44,  97. 
Sanday,  14,  103,  230,  231. 
Sanhedrin,  170,  175,  200. 


Satan,  42. 

Schurer,  46,  50,  86,  99,  107,  178,  180. 

190,  219,  224,  226. 
Scribes,  185,  186. 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  180,  181. 
Shammai,  146. 
Shema',  180. 
Siloam,  205. 
Simeon,  43. 
Simon,  44. 
Simon  of  Cyrene,  3. 
Simon,  High  Priest,  96. 
Simon  Maccabasus,  44. 
Sinaiticus,  27, 
Sinaitic  Syriac,  27, 
Smith,  41,  206. 
Stanley,  172. 
Stanton,  11,  23. 
Streeter,  13,  22. 
Swete,  8,  11,  149,  150,  167,  186,  203, 

224,  230,  247. 
Synagogue,  50,  51,  107. 


Tacitus,  187,  190. 
Taxation,  57,  58. 
Tell  Hum,  45, 
Temple,  187. 
Theophilus,  6. 
Tiberias,  95. 
Trachonitis,  97. 
Tristram,  39,  42,  54,  201, 


Vaticanus,  27. 


Wendling,  13. 
Westcott,  224. 


W 


Zahn,  2,  5,  II,  28,  2i8. 
Zebedee,  238. 


251 


INDEX  OF  BIBLICAL  PASSAGES  REFERRED 
TO  IN  TEXT 


PAGE 

Genesis  1:2 41 

2:24 147 

19:17 67 

10:21 176 

25:26 44 

29:33 44 

32:10 94 

37:29,  34 221 

40:11 157 

Exodus  3 179 

11:5 143 

12:1-28 200 

16:10 132 

19:9.  16 132 

20:5 68 

20:8-11 6 

20:12 108 

21:17 108 

21:30 159 

22:22 185 

24:8 210 

24:15 132 

33:9 132 

34:21 61 

35:2 61 

40:35 132 

Leviticus  2:13 144 

II no 

11:22 39 

15:12 107 

15:19-27 87 

16:2 132 

18:16 96 

19:15 176 

19:18 181 

25:24 159 


PAGE 

Numbers  3 :49 159 

11:25 132 

12:14 221 

14:6 221 

15:37-41 180 

15:38-40 106 

19:2 162 

19:9 107 

35:30 220 

Deuteronomy  4:24 68 

6:4-9 180 

10:17 176 

11:13-21 180 

15:9 Ill 

17:6 220 

18:15,  18 132 

19:15 220 

21:3 162 

21:23 238 

23:25 61 

24:1 147 

25:5-10 178 

25:9 221 

27:16 108 

Joshua  9:4 61 

10:36-39 50 

15:20-61 50 

15:25 68 

Judges  1:19 67 

12:6 223 

14:10 59 

Ruth  2:14 234 

I  Samuel  2:14 107 

15:22 182 

16:7 176 

21:1 9 


253 


PASSAGES  REFERRED  TO  IN  TEXT 


PAGE 

I  Samuel  22:20 62 

42:8 176 

II  Samuel  8:17 62 

17:13 187 

I  Kings  2:19 157 

13:4-6 63 

17:8-24 235 

19:2,  10 13s 

n  Kings  1:8 39 

4:34 51 

4:42 94 

5:11 51 

5:14 107 

7:18 lOI 

9:13 163 

14:25 44 

23:10 144 

I  Clironicles  3:24 44 

18:16 10,  62 

n  Chronicles  23:3 144 

35:13 107 

Esther  5:3,  6 98 

7:2 98 

Job  4:15 104 

Psalms  2:7 41 

22 234,  235 

22:18 233 

23:5 202 

41:9 208 

SI 182 

69:21 231 

82:2 176 

89:32 66 

91:11 42 

no 221 

110:1 157,  183 

115-118 211 

118:25 163 

Proverbs  18:5 176 

Song  of  Solomon  2:13 166 

Isaiah  5:1 172 

5:24 144 

8:21 189 

11:12 41 

13:13 189 


PAGE 

Isaiah  14:11 144 

14:30 189 

29:13 108 

42:1 4i»  132 

44:3 40 

45:13 159 

48:16 41 

50:6 221 

53 208,  217 

56:7 167 

60:5,  II 152 

61:1 41,  91 

62:4 41 

66:24 144 

Jeremiah  7:31 144 

23:9 S3 

23:19 189 

24:2 166 

31:31-33 210 

48:24,  41 68 

Lamentations  4:1 187 

Ezekiel  5:12 189 

16:1-22 129 

20:30 144 

36:25 40 

Daniel  3:18 177 

3:25 • 237 

6:10 177 

7:10 196 

7:13 55,  221 

9:27 188 

11:31 188,  193 

12:1 194 

12:2 154 

12:11 193 

Hosea  2:2-13 129 

6:6-8 182 

Joel  2:30 119 

2:31 23s 

2:32 19s 

Amos  8:9 235 

Micah  1:6 187 

Nahum  3:3 131 

Zechariah  9:9 162 

11:12 204 


254 


PASSAGES  REFERRED  TO  IN  TEXT 


PAGE 

Zechariah  13  4 39 

137 212 

Malachi  4:5 96,  134 

I  Maccabees  1 154 193 

4:46 39 

6:39 131 

14:41 39 

I  Esdras  1:17 200 

8:57 131 

IV  Esdras  2 129 144 

16:36-40 189 

Enoch  1:1 195 

1:6 189 

27:1 144 

Matthew  3:7 59 

3:14-17 39 

3:1s 52 

4:8 129 

5:21-48 180 

5:26 186 

5:43-48 181 

5:31 146 

6:21 62 

6:23 152 

7:2 78 

7:12 181 

7:21 72 

8:6 53 

8:11 114 

8:18 80 

8:21 72 

8:24 80 

8:28 83 

8:29 47 

9:11,14 52 

9:23,  24 89 

9:30 52 

10:1 93 

10:5 93,  114 

10:7 93 

10:23 191 

10:25 70 

10:34-39 72 

11:2-30 69 

11:9 39 


PAGE 

Matthew  11:14 96,  135 

11:28 51 

12:5-7 62 

12:22 69 

12:23 69,  go,  95 

12:28,  45 62 

12:34 70 

12:40 127 

12:43 46 

13:1 72 

13:13 75 

13:26 78 

13:41 196 

13:43 196 

14:5 97 

15:1-20 180 

15:11 62 

15:20 Ill 

15:30 114 

16:14 96 

17:20 79 

17:24 48 

17:27 143,  162 

18:17 58 

19:3 i4<5 

19:10-12 148 

19:28 67,  157 

20:15 Ill 

22:18 in 

23:5 180,  185 

23:5-7 Ill 

23:6 64,  185 

23:24 152 

23:33 180 

24:3,14,29 6 

24:41 143 

24:45-51 199 

25 199 

25:29 78 

25:31 196 

26:39,42 72 

26:55 185 

27:15 226 

27:52 89 

27:56 44 


255 


PASSAGES  REFERRED  TO  IN  TEXT 


PAGE 

Matthew  28:16 27 

Luke  2:27 183 

3:7 38 

3:10 38 

3:12 38,  58 

3:1s 95 

4:16 52 

4:16-21 51 

4:16-30 114 

91 


4:18 

4:21.... 
4:25-27. 
4:28-30. 

4:33 

4:39 

5:1-3... 


91 

93 

92 

46 

81 

57 

5:3 66,  81 

5:17 S3 

5:29 57 

6:2 52 

6:38 78 

6:42 70 

7:11-17 69,  81 

7:14 52,  90 

7:18-35 69 

7:23 212 

7:36-50 69 

7:37 58,  237 

7:39 52 

7:46 202 

8:2 185 

8:43 186 

8:5s 90 

9:1 93 

9:2 93 

9:7 95 

9:8 96 

9:10,  II,  12 100 

9:51-56 146 

9:54 68 

10:4 94 

10:26-28 52 

10:29-37 181 

10:39-42 203 

ii:i 59 


Luke  I 
12 
12 
12 
12 
13 
13 
13 
13 
13 
13 
14 
14 
14 
14 
15 
15 
15 
15 
16 
17 
17 
17 
18 
18 
18: 
19 
19 
19: 
19 
19 
19 
21 
21 
21 
22 
22 
22 
22 
22 
22 
22: 
22 
23: 
24: 


PAGE 

2:1 146 

:8 s6 

:i6-2o 129 

:20 Ill 

:42-46 199 

:2 54 

:i4 64 

:24 152 

:27 157 

:3i-33 103 

:34 116 

:3-S 64 

•7 64 

:7-ix 185 

:25 72,  146 

:i 146 

:i2 186 

:22 185 

:30 185,  186 

29 179 

:6 79 

:i4 52 

:23-34 195 

:i2 59 

:23 98 

:43 161 

:i-6 57 

:i-io 58 

:io 56 

:ii 157,  160 

:26 78 

:4i 116 

:5 187 

:20,  24 6 

:36 56 

:3 208 

:20 210 

:24 93 

:24-26 141 

:29 157 

:3o 67 

:35 94 

:39 211 

128 194 

:io-i2 127 


256 


PASSAGES  REFERRED  TO  IN  TEXT 


PAGE 

Luke  24:30 103 

24:44 179 

John  1-3 43 

1:14 133 

1:21 96,  132 

1:30-34 39 

1:42 57 

1:4s 132,  179 

1:48 162 

1:51 196 

2:6 107 

2:13-16 166 

2:18 167 

2:19 127,  167 

2:20 166 

3:10 73 

3:14 127 

3:28 38 

4:17 108 

4:34 72 

4:44 92 

s-^ "7 

5:3 63 

5:7 54 

5:14 54 

5:16-18 127 

5:30 72 

5:44 2 

6:9 loi 

6:14 90 

6:23 95 

6:24 105 

6:38 72 

6:42 92 

6:51-56 127 

6:51 209 

6:52-58 209 

6:59 i°5 

6:60-63 119 

6:67 125 

6:68 "7 

7:7 192 

7:19-24 127 

8:20 185 

9:2 54 

2 


John  9:6.  ..  . 
9:16.  .  . 
10:41 .  .  . 
11:11-14 
11:16. . . 


PAGE 
IIS 

70 

96 

89 

213 

11:41 "6 

11:43 90,  203 

12:6 204 

12:20-22 186 

12:20-50 184 

12:24 79 

12:34 56 

12:36 187 

13:2 208 

13:26 204 

15:18-24 192 

16:2 192 

16:13 191 

18:15 ••••   2 

18:20 46 

18:39 226 

I9-23 94 

19:39 203 

20:1-9 127 

20:1-10 2 

21:9,  13 ^°^ 

Acts  1:6 121,  127,  152,  157,  183 

2:23 8,  75 

2:28 210 

2:38 8,  38 

2:43 137 

3:2 63 

3:22 132 

4:8 191 

4:17 192 

4:19 177 

4:28 8,  75 

5:15 66 

5:29 177 

5:41 192 

6:14 220 

7:42 179 

7:55 157 

7:60 39 

8:22 76 


57 


PASSAGES  REFERRED  TO  IN  TEXT 


PAGE 

.  176 

.  192 

.  118 

.  203 

.  94 

.  127 


Acts  9:2 

9:14 

9:25 

9:37 

9:39 

10:9-16 

19:14 106 

10:15 8,  III 

10:28 152 

10:40 127 

10:43 8,  38,  210 

11:26 9 


12:1. . 
12:2. . 
12:12. 
12:13. 
12:25. 
13:5-. 
13:9- • 
13:13. 
13:15. 
13:36. 


157 

44 

6 

222 

6 

6 

191 

6 

86 

89 

13:38 8,  38,  210 

13:51 94 

15:39 6 

16:1 203 

18:6 94 

18:25 176 

19:9 176 

19:11 66 

19:13-16 46,  139 

19:23 176 

22:16 210 

23:8 178 

23:9 58 

23:10 83 

24:14,  22 176 


26:9 

27:3s 

28:23 

Romans  1:29-31 

3:23 

4:7 

8:9 

11:2 


192 
102 
179 
III 
159 
76 
183 
179 


PAGE 

Romans  11:7,  25 8,  75 

13:9 181 

13:13 Ill 

14 3,  8,  III 

14:13-15 143 

14:14 106 

14:20-23 143 

15:19 191 

16:13 3 

I  Corinthians  2:4 191 

3:23 9 

6:8 8 

6:12-20 Ill 

7:10-16 148 

8 Ill 

8:4,  7,  9-13 143 

9:9 47,  81 

10:23-33 8,  III 

11:24 209,  211 

11:25 210 

12:3 183 

15:1-8 26 

15:4 127 

15:20 89 

15:35-53 178 

15:37 79 

II  Corinthians  5:12 176 


6:1. 

Galatians 

2:6. 


:i4. 


-14. 


2:11- 
2:15..., 
3:13-  •• 
4:22.  . . 
5:14... 
5:19-21 


71 
107 
176 
127 

58 
159 
222 
181 
III 


Ephesians  1:7 159 

3:3-6 74 

4:19 8,  III 

4:31 8,  III 

5:3 8,  III 

6:19 74 

Philippians  3:7 129 

Colossians  4:10 6 

I  Thessalonians  1:9 12 


258 


PASSAGES  REFERRED  TO  IN  TEXT 


PAGE 

II  Thessalonians  1:7 129 

2:1-3 189 

2:9-12 19s 

I  Timothy  2:6 159 

5:18 47 

II  Timothy  4:11 6 

Titus  2:14 159 

Philemon  24 6 

Hebrews  1:13 196 

1:14 129 

6:18-20 236 

9:i2-i4 159 

10:19 236 

James  1 12-4 144 

2:8 181 

2:19 47 

5:4 Ill 

5:14 95 

5:1s 76 

I  Peter  1:18 159 

2:8 8,  75 

3:17 64 


PAGE 

I  Peter  5:13 6 

II  Peter  1:17 132,  133 

I  John  1 :9 76 

2:12 76 

III  John  II 64 

Jude  16 176 

Revelations  1:7 196 

1:9 157 

1:10 183 

2:17 57 

6:8 189 

6:11 18s 

6:13 166 

6:15 97 

11:13 189 

13:18 198 

14:14 196 

16:18 194 

17:14 195 

18:8 189 

21:12,  14 67 

21:27 106 


Printed  in  the  United  States  of  America 


259 


The  Bible  for  Home  and  School 

Edited  by  SHAILER  MATHEWS,  D.D.,  Dean  of  the  Divinity 
School,  and  Professor  of  Historical  and  Comparative  Theology  in 
the  University  of  Chicago,  Editor  of  the  Series  of"  New  Testament 
Handbooks,"  etc. 

"  Biblical  science  has  progressed  rapidly  during  the  past  few  years,  but  the 
reader  still  lacks  a  brief  but  comprehensive  commentary  that  shall  extend 
to  him  in  usable  form  material  now  at  the  disposition  of  the  student.  It  is 
hoped  that  in  this  series  the  needs  of  intelligent  Sunday-school  teachers 
have  been  met,  as  well  as  those  of  clergymen  and  lay  readers,  and  that  in 
scope,  purpose,  and  loyalty  to  the  Scriptures  as  a  foundation  of  Christian 
thought  and  life,  its  volumes  will  stimulate  the  intelligent  use  of  the  Bible  in 
the  home  and  the  school."  —  From  the  General  Introduction  to  the  Series. 

Each  volume  is  convenient  in  size,  well  printed  on  excellent  paper, 
and  attractively  and  serviceably  bound. 


VOLUMES  NOW  READY 

THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS 

By  EDGAR  J.  GOODSPEED,  Assistant  Professor  of  Biblical  and 
Patristic  Greek  in  the  University  of  Chicago. 

Cloth,  ix-\-Tj2  pages.     Price,  50  cents 

"It  is  scholarly  and  modern,  yet  simple,  a  truly  interpretive  commentary, 
not  uncritical,  though  criticism  is  not  obtruded,  not  without  the  results  of 
keen  philological  study,  though  the  reader  sees  little  or  nothing  of  the  pro- 
cesses. The  Episde  becomes  an  illuminating  exponent  of  the  spiritual  life  of 
its  time."  —  Benjamin  W.  Bacon  in  the  Yale  Divinity  Quarterly. 

A  (^'X'C     Being  the  second  volume  of  Luke's  work  on  the  Beginnings  of 
*»>^  A  ^     Christianity,  with  interpretative  comment. 

By  GEORGE  HOLLEY  GILBERT,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 

Cloth,  26j  yages.    Price,  "js  cents 

"  Dr.  Mathews  and  his  fellow-editors  are  performing  a  task  for  the  Church 
of  to-day  that  should  be  far-reaching  in  its  results;  for  there  is  pressing  need 
that  the  rank  and  file  of  Bible  students  be  equipped  with  the  material  for  an 
historical  interpretation.  This  is  a  necessary  step  to  the  creation  of  a  theol- 
ogy which  is  in  harmony  with  the  present  age,  wherein  all  science  is  studied 
historically;  and,  furthermore,  the  transition  from  the  traditional  to  the  his- 
torical view  will  be  furthered  through  the  production  of  such  aids  to  Bible 
study  as  those  under  review,  rather  than  through  theoretical  discussions  on 
the  relative  merits  of  the  respective  views."  —  Lutheran  Quarterly. 


THE   MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

Publishers  64-66  Fifth  Avenue  New  York 


The  Bible  for  Home  and  School — Volumes  now  ready — Cont. 


GENESIS 

By  HINCKLEY  GILBERT  MITCHELL,  Ph.D.,  D.D.,  Professor 
of  Hebrew  and  Old  Testament  Exegesis  in  Boston  University. 

Cloth,  377  pages.    Price,  go  cents 

**  The  introduction  to  this  volume  on  Genesis  gives  the  yerv  best  and  clear- 
est analysis  of  the  book,  according  to  the  *  modern  critical  theories,'  to  be 
had  anywhere." —  The  Presbyterian. 

"  Genesis  has  always  been  one  of  the  most  popular  books  of  the  Bible,  yet 
in  some  ways  it  is  one  of  the  most  difficult.  These  difficulties  arise  partly 
from  the  book  itself  and  partly  from  the  popular  conception  of  the  book.  It 
takes  scholarship  to  handle  the  first  class  of  difficulties,  and  courage  the  sec- 
ond ;  and  Dr.  Mitchell  has  both  scholarship  and  courage.  .  .  .  The  notes 
are  learned  and  brief  and  have  a  vivacity  uat  make  Genesis  seem  quite  a 
modem  book."  —  Boston  Transcript. 


GALATIANS 

By  BENJAMIN  WISNER  BACON,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of 
New  Testament  Criticism  and  Exegesis  in  Yale  University. 

Cloth,  13$  pages.    Price,  so  cents 

'*  Learned,  vigorous,  and  stimulating."— ^w^rzVa«  Journal  of  Theology. 
*'  We  know  of  no  commentary  which  gives  a  better  exposition  in  so  brief  a 
compass."  —  The  Reform  Church  Review. 


COLOSSIANS  AND  EPHESIANS 

By  GROSS  ALEXANDER,  Editor  of  The  Methodist  Review, 

Cloth,  132 pages.     Price,  50  cents 

"  Judging  from  the  volumes  that  have  appeared,  the  general  editor  of  these 
commentaries  has  been  very  successful  in  getting  commentators  who  have 
the  skill  so  to  treat  the  books  of  the  Bible  that  they  come  to  the  men  of  to-day 
with  vital  power.  The  introductions  to  these  two  epistles  are  marvels  of  com- 
pactness ;  yet  all  that  is  necessary  to  those  for  whom  this  series  is  intended 
for  an  understanding  of  these  letters  will  be  found  here." — Boston  Transcript. 


THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

Publishers  64-66  Fifth  Avenue  New  York 


The  Bible  for  Home  and  School — Volumes  now  ready — Coni. 


AMOS,  HOSEA,  AND  MICAH 

By  JOHN   M.  POWIS  SMITH. 

i2mo,  7C  cents 

DEUTERONOMY 

By  Professor  W.  G.  JORDAN,  of  Queens  University. 

Price.  7C  cents 

ISAIAH 

By  JOHN  E.  McFADYEN,  Professor  of  Old  Testament  Literature 
and  Exegesis  in  Knox  College,  Toronto. 

Price,  go  cents 


JOB 


By  GEORGE  A.  BARTON.  A.M.,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Biblical 
Literature  and  Semitic  Languages  in  Bryn  Mawr  College. 

Price,  go  cents 

The  commentary  differs  from  the  large  majority  of  commentaries  on  Job,  in 
that  its  author  believes  that  the  Hebrew  poet  was  as  great  in  religious 
insight  as  in  poetic  genius,  and  that  he  did  not  leave  the  problem  of  suffer- 
ing unsolved,  but  proposed  for  it  a  solution,  the  most  profound  that  can  be 
suggested,  and  that  a  religious  solution. 

JUDGES 

By  E.  L.  CURTIS. 

Cloth.    Price,  7/  cents 

In  general  style  this  addition  to  the  "  Bible  for  Home  and  School "  follows 
the  deservedly  popular  commentaries  already  published  in  the  series.  There 
is  an  introduction  in  which  points  of  special  interest  are  noted,  a  liberal  sup- 
ply of  notes  elucidating  doubtful  passages,  an  index,  and  a  bibliography. 
The  book  well  carries  out  the  spirit  and  aim  of  the  series  —  to  place  at  the 
disposal  of  the  general  reader  the  results  of  the  best  modern  Biblical  scholar- 
ship. The  editing  has  been  conservative,  though  no  established  facts  have 
been  ignored.  The  circulation  of  the  compact  and  convenient  volumes  of 
the  series  of  which  this  is  one  cannot  fail  to  stimulate  the  intelligent  use  of 
the  Bible  in  the  home  and  in  the  school. 

MARK 

By  M.  W.  JACOBUS. 

i2mo 

MATTHEW 

By  Professor  A.  T.  ROBERTSON,  of  the  Southern  Baptist 
Theological  Seminary. 

Price,  60  cents 

THE   MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

Publishers  64-66  Fifth  Avenue  New  York 


NEW   BOOKS  ON  RELIGION 


THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE 
CHRISTIAN  RELIGION 

By  SHAILER  MATHEWS,  Author  of  "The  Church  and  the 
Changing  Order,"  "  The  Gospel  and  the  Modern  Man,"  etc. 

Cloth.     i2mo 

Dr.  Mathews  here  enters  upon  the  little  explored  territory  of  social  theology. 
His  general  position  is  that  the  scientific  theologian  should  approach  his 
task  through  the  social  sciences,  particularly  history,  rather  than  through 
philosophy.  The  main  thesis  of  the  book  is  that  doctrines  grow  out  of  the 
same  social  forces  as  express  themselves  in  other  forms  of  life.  Dr.  Mathews 
finds  seven  creative  social  minds  and  treats  the  development  of  the  various 
Christian  doctrines  as  they  have  emerged  from  the  earlier  of  these  minds 
and  must  be  created  by  our  modern  social  mind.  Such  a  treatment  of  Chris- 
tian doctrine  serves  to  make  theology  a  vital  rather  than  a  merely  scholastic 
or  ecclesiastical  matter.  The  study  of  the  social  minds  of  the  past,  with 
their  creative  influence  on  Christianity,  gives  a  point  of  view  for  the  study 
of  the  intellectual  needs  of  to-day's  religion.  This  volume  conserves  the 
values  of  the  religious  thinking  of  the  past,  and  is,  in  addition,  a  positive 
force  in  the  reconstruction  of  the  religious  thinking  of  the  day. 


THE  DRAMA  OF  THE  SPIRITUAL 

LIFE :  A  Study  of  Religious  Experience  and  Ideals 

By  ANNIE  L.  SEARS.     With  an  Introduction  by  Dr.  JosiaH 

ROYCE.  ^,    ,      „ 

Cloth.    8vo 

The  basis  of  this  book  is  an  empirical  study  of  the  prayers,  hymns,  and  gen- 
eral religious  poetry  and  other  expressions  of  religious  experience.  In  the 
opening  chapter  it  is  stated  that  "  man  is  incurably  religious  "  because,  as 
human,  man  is  idealistic.  Religion  is,  therefore,  close  to  the  common  life, 
yet  in  religious  idealism  a  problem  is  involved.  This  problem  religious 
mysticism  attempts  to  solve.  In  the  second  chapter  the  author  seeks  to 
make  clear  what  are  the  universal  elements  of  religious  experience,  and  m 
the  succeeding  portions  of  the  volume  she  traces  the  story  of  religious  ex- 
perience through  its  differences,  oppositions,  tensions,  conflicts,  compro- 
mises and  reconciliations.  The  problem  of  the  work  is  to  discover  whether 
the  conflicting  elements  and  forms  of  religion  can  be  harmonized  and 
whether  a  significant  spiritual  experience  results. 


THE   MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

Publishers  64-66  Fifth  Avenue  New  York 


Date  Due 

OWf^    ^ 

'■'  ■/  ii?{m     \ 

i 

f) 

PRINTED 

IN  U.  S.  A. 

BS491.B58  41 

A  commentary  on  the  Gospel  according  to 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00006  4149 


